THE  LIBRARY 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 
OF  CALIFORNIA 

LOS  ANGELES 


STUDIES  IN  HISTORY,  ECONOMICS  AND  PUBLIC  LAW 

EDITED  BY  THE   FACULTY  OF  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 
OF  COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY 


Volume  XL VI] 


[Number  3 


Whole  Number  116 


SYNDICALISM    IN   FRANCE 


BY 

LOUIS  LEVINE,  Ph.D. 

WITH   AN   INTRODUCTION 

BY 

PROFESSOR  FRANKLIN  H.  GIDDINGS 
SECOND   REVISED   EDITION 

OF 

"The  Labor  Movement  in  France" 


fflork 
COLUMBIA   UNIVERSITY 

LONGMANS,  GREEN  &  CO.,  AGENTS 

LONDON  :  P.  S.  KING  &  SON,  LTD. 

1914 


COPYRIGHT,  1912 

BY 
LOUIS  LEVINE 


College 
Library 

HD 


PREFACE  TO  FIRST  EDITION 

THE  term  syndicalism  sounds  strange  to  an  English 
reader.  Its  equivalent  in  English  would  be  Unionism.  A 
syndicate  is  a  union  of  workingmen,  on  a  trade  or  on  an  in- 
dustrial basis,  for  the  defense  of  economic  interests. 

Revolutionary  Syndicalism,  however,  has  a  broader  con- 
notation than  the  etymology  of  the  term  would  suggest.  A 
critical  analysis  of  existing  institutions,  a  socialist  ideal, 
and  a  peculiar  conception  of  revolutionary  methods  to  be 
used  for  the  realization  of  the  ideal  —  are  all  contained  in 
it.  Revolutionary  Syndicalism  appears,  therefore,  as  a 
phase  of  the  general  movement  towards  a  reorganization 
of  society  on  socialist  principles.1 

Revolutionary  Syndicalism  cannot  be  treated,  however, 
exclusively  as  a  phase  of  the  evolution  of  Socialism.  As 
the  term  suggests,  it  is  also  a  development  of  the  French 
Labor  Movement.  The  organization  which  represents 
Revolutionary  Syndicalism  in  France  is  the  General  Con- 
federation of  Labor  (La  Confederation  Generate  du  Tra- 
vail, generally  referred  to  as  the  C.  G.  T.)  —  the  central 
organization  of  the  labor  unions  or  syndicates  in  France. 
The  history  of  Revolutionary  Syndicalism  coincides  al- 
most entirely  with  the  history  of  the  General  Confedera- 
tion, and  it  may  be  said  that  its  future  is  entirely  bound 
up  with  the  destinies  of  this  organization. 

In  fact,  Revolutionary  Syndicalism  is  an  attempt  to  fuse 
revolutionary  socialism  and  trade  unionism  into  one  co- 

1  The  term  "  socialist  "  is  here  used  in  a  wide  sense  to  include  all 
varieties,  even  communistic  anarchism. 

235]  5 


PREFACE  TO  FIRST  EDITION 


[236 


herent  movement.  Peculiar  conditions  of  French  social 
history  have  thrown  the  socialists  and  anarchists  into  the 
syndicates  and  have  secured  their  leadership  there.  In  this! 
respect,  Revolutionary  Syndicalism  is  a  unique  and  inter- 
esting chapter  in  the  history  of  both  Socialism  and  Trades 
unionism  and  of  their  mutual  relations. 

Revolutionary  Syndicalism  has  attracted  much  attention 
outside  of  France.  Its  more  or  less  rapid  development, 
the  turmoil  into  which  it  has  thrown  France  several  times, 
the  extreme  ideas  which  it  expresses,  the  violent  methods 
it  advocates,  and  its  attempts  of  proselytism  outside  of 
France  have  awakened  an  interest  in  it.  A  number  of 
studies  on  the  movement  have  appeared  in  German,  Ital- 
ian, Russian  and  other  European  periodicals  and  books. 
In  English,  however,  the  subject  has  not  received  the  con- 
sideration it  would  seem  to  deserve  from  the  theoretical  as 
well  as  from  the  practical  point  of  view. 

Revolutionary  Syndicalism  as  an  aggressive  movement. 
Its  aim  is  to  do  away  with  existing  institutions  and  to  re- 
construct society  along  new  lines.  It  must,  therefore,  nec- 
essarily call  forth  a  definite  attitude  on  the  part  of  those 
who  become  acquainted  with  it.  Those  who  speak  about 
it  are  either  its  friends  or  its  enemies,  and  even  those  who 
want  to  be  impartial  towards  it  are  generally  unable  to 
resist  the  flood  of  sentiment  which  such  a  movement  sets; 
loose  in  them. 

Impartiality,  however,  has  been  the  main  effort  of  the 
writer  of  this  study.  It  has  appeared  to  him  more  im- 
portant to  describe  the  facts  as  they  are  and  to  understand 
the  conditions  back  of  the  facts,  than  to  pass  sentence 
whether  of  approval  or  of  condemnation.  He  has  made 
the  effort,  therefore, '  to  suppress  his  personality  entirely 
in  all  that  part  of  his  work  which  is  purely  descriptive. 
The  method  adopted  has  been  to  describe  ideas  and  facts 


237]  PREFACE  TO  FIRST  EDITION  j 

sympathetically — whether  syndicalist  or  anti-syndicalist, 
whether  promoting  or  hindering  the  development  of  Revo- 
lutionary Syndicalism. 

The  idea  that  has  guided  the  writer  is  as  follows:  Let 
us  imagine  that  social  phenomena  could  be  registered  auto- 
matically. All  social  facts  would  then  be  recorded  with  all 
the  sympathies  and  antipathies  with  which  they  are  mixed 
in  real  life,  because  the  latter  are  part  of  the  facts. 
When  social  descriptions  go  wrong  it  is  not  because  they 
are  tinged  with  feeling,  but  because  they  are  colored  by 
those  feelings  which  they  arouse  in  the  writer  and  not  by 
those  which  accompany  them  in  reality.  The  main  task 
of  the  writer,  therefore,  is  to  try  to  enter  into  the  feelings 
which  go  along  with  the  facts  which  he  is  describing. 

This  means  that  the  writer  must  alternately  feel  and 
think  as  a  different  person.  However  difficult  this  may  be, 
it  is  still  possible  by  an  effort  of  imagination  prompted  by 
a  desire  to  get  at  the  truth. 

This  method  seems  more  correct  than  an  attempt  to  re- 
main entirely  indifferent  and  not  to  be  swayed  by  any 
feeling.  Indifference  does  not  secure  impartiality;  it  re- 
sults mostly  in  colorlessness.  For  instance,  were  the 
writer  to  remain  indifferent  or  critical  while  describing  the 
syndicalist  ideas,  the  latter  could  not  be  outlined  with  all 
the  force  and  color  with  which  they  appear  in  the  exposi- 
tion of  their  representatives.  This  would  not  produce  an 
impartial  description,  therefore,  but  a  weak  and  conse- 
quently untrue  one.  On  the  contrary,  by  trying  to  feel 
and  to  think  as  a  revolutionary  syndicalist,  while  describ- 
ing the  syndicalist  ideas,  it  is  possible  to  come  nearer  to 
reality.  The  same  method  is  used  in  the  description  of 
anti-syndicalist  ideas  and  efforts. 

The  result  seems  to  the  writer  to  be  the  creation  of  the 
necessary  illusion  and  the  reproduction  of  the  atmosphere 


8  PREFACE  TO  FIRST  EDITION  [238 

in  which  the  movement  developed.  A  critical  and  personal 
attitude  has  been  taken  only  when  the  writer  wished  to  ex- 
press his  own  views.  Whether  the  writer  has  been  more 
successful  than  others  in  this  attempt,  is  for  the  reader  to 
decide. 

From  the  point  of  view  taken  in  this  essay,  Revolution- 
ary Syndicalism  has  to  be  described  both  as  a  theory  and  as 
a  practice.  The  effort  is  made  throughout,  however,  to 
consider  the  theory  in  close  relation  to  the  practice. 

The  first  chapter  is  introductory  and  serves  merely  to 
give  the  necessary  historical  perspective.  This  explains  itsi 
brevity. 

Revolutionary  Syndicalism  is  undoubtedly  a  peculiar 
product  of  French  life  and  history.  Still  many  of  its  ideas 
have  a  general  character  and  may  be  oi  interest  to  men  and 
women  of  other  countries.  After  all,  the  problems  that 
confront  the  whole  civilized  world  to-day  are  the  same,  and 
the  conditions  in  which  their  solution  has  to  be  tried  are 
everywhere  alike  in  many  respects.  It  has  been  the  writer's! 
sincere  hope  throughout  this  work  that  the  history  of  syn- 
dicalism may  stimulate  the  readers  of  this  essay  to  reflec- 
tion and  criticism  that  may  be  of  help  to  them  in  their 
efforts  to  advance  the  cause  of  social  progress  in  their  own 
country. 

The  author  wishes  to  make  grateful  acknowledgments  to 
Professor  Vladimir  G.  Simkhovitch,  Professor  Henry 
Rogers  Seager  and  other  professors  of  Columbia  Univer- 
sity who  have  in  one  way  or  another  aided  him  in  the 
prosecution  of  his  work;  but  especially  is  he  indebted  to 
Professor  Franklin  H.  Giddings  for  invaluable  criticisms 
and  suggestions  which  have  guided  him  throughout  his 
work,  and  to  Professor  Edwin  R.  A.  Seligman  for  encour- 
agement and  advice,  and  help  in  making  it  possible  for  the 
work  to  appear  in  its  present  form. 

NOVEMBER,  1911.  LOUIS  LEVINE. 


PREFACE  TO  SECOND  EDITION 

THE  term  syndicalism  no  longer  needs  an  introduction  to 
the  English  reader.  Within  the  past  two  years  it  has  been 
naturalized  in  all  English-speaking  countries,  and  has  be- 
come more  or  less  widely  known.  It  has  even  been  enriched 
as  a  result  of  its  migration.  In  France  it  simply  expressed 
the  comparatively  innocent  idea  of  trade  unionism,  while 
both  in  England  and  America  it  has  come  to  designate  those 
explosive  and  aggressive  forms  of  labor  unionism  which  the 
French  described  in  the  words  "  revolutionary  syndical- 
ism." The  English  use  oi  the  term  has  reacted  upon  the 
French  syndicalists  who  have  now  generally  dropped  the 
adjective  "  revolutionary  "  and  speak  of  their  movement  as 
"  le  syndicalisme "  or  "  le  syndicalisme  francais."  In  a 
word,  as  a  result  of  recent  industrial  events  the  world 
over,  syndicalism  has  emerged  as  a  new  movement  of  inter- 
national scope  and  character.  The  most  significant  mani- 
festation of  this  new  development  was  the  first  international 
syndicalist  congress  whigh  was  held  in  London  during  the 
month  of  September  of  last  year  and  at  which  delegates 
from  France,  Germany,  Holland,  Belgium,  the  United 
States,  England  and  other  countries  were  present. 

The  appearance  of  syndicalist  tendencies  in  other  coun- 
tries has  thrown  some  new  light  upon  the  subject.  What 
was  considered  at  one  time  the  peculiar  product  of  France 
or  of  the  "  Latin  spirit,"  appears  now  to  transcend  the 
boundaries  of  particular  countries  and  of  kindred  racial 
groups.  It  is  evidently  more  closely  related  to  industrial 
conditions.  But  its  emergence  in  such  countries  as  England 
239]  9 


I0  PREFACE  TO  SECOND  EDITION  [240 

and  the  United  States  destroys  the  familiar  hypothesis  that 
syndicalism  is  bred  only  by  the  small  workshop.  The  lat- 
ter may  explain  some  peculiar  aspects  of  French  syndical- 
ism; it  can  not  explain  the  methods  of  direct  action  and  the 
syndicalist  spirit  common  to  all  countries. 

The  explanation  seems  to  me  to  lie  in  the  direction  indi- 
cated in  the  concluding  chapter  of  this  book.  Three  essen- 
tial causes  for  the  development  of  French  syndicalism  are 
pointed  out  in  it:  namely,  political  disillusionment,  thet 
economic  weakness  of  the  labor  elements,  and  the  com- 
paratively static  character  of  French  industry.  Recent  in- 
dustrial developments  in  England  and  the  United  States 
prove  that  the  same  conditions  explain  the  appearance  of 
syndicalist  tendencies  everywhere.  The  disappointment  of 
the  British  workers  in  the  political  possibilities  of  the  Labor 
Party,  the  general  mistrust  of  "  politicians  "  and  the  actual 
disfranchisement  of  large  elements  of  the  working  popula- 
tion in  the  United  States  are  facts  which  are  not  disputed, 
and  the  influence  of  which  in  recent  industrial  events  is  no 
longer  denied.  The  comparative  weakness  of  sectional 
unionism  in  England  and  of  the  unskilled  elements  in  the 
American  labor  movement  has  been  brought  home  to  the 
workers  themselves  and  has  determined  their  change  of 
tactics.  Some  French  syndicalists  have  criticized  the  au- 
thor of  this  book  for  laying  too  much  emphasis  on  the  finan- 
cial weakness  of  the  syndicates  in  France.  But  that  is  a 
misunderstanding  on  their  part;  the  emphasis  is  not  on 
finances,  but  on  weakness  which  may  be  the  result  of  many 
circumstances.  Labor  unions  may  have  millions  in  the 
banks,  and  still  be  weak  economically  on  account  of  the 
technical  conditions  of  the  industry  or  of  the  strong  organi- 
zation of  the  employers.  A  consciousness  of  weakness  in 
certain  respects  must  not  lead  necessarily  to  submission  or 
to  despair.  But  it  generally  leads  to  efforts  in  new  direc- 


241  ]  PREFACE  TO  SECOND  EDITION  II 

tions  and  to  new  methods  of  action.  It  has  resulted  in  the 
amalgamation  of  unions  in  England  and  in  the  wonderful 
effort  to  create  a  general  spirit  of  solidarity  among  all  ele- 
ments of  labor  the  world  over. 

The  comparatively  static  character  of  industrial  life  in 
France  has  no  parallel  in  England  or  the  United  States. 
This  explains  why  in  the  latter  two  countries  the  ideal  as- 
pects of  syndicalism  have  obtained  less  significance  than  in 
France.  In  an  atmosphere  of  slow  industrial  growth,  pos- 
sibilities of  immediate  industrial  gains  do  not  loom  up  large 
in  the  eyes  of  the  workers,  and  no  hope  of  considerable  per- 
manent improvement  under  given  conditions  is  aroused; 
on  the  other  hand,  the  forcible  acquisition  of  the  whole  in- 
dustrial equipment  and  its  co-operative  management  seem 
comparatively  easy. 

In  the  concluding  chapter  of  this  book,  the  possibilities 
of  a  change  in  the  character  of  French  syndicalism  which 
were  indicated  in  the  first  edition  are  left  unchanged. 
Developments  are  not  yet  ripe  to  warrant  any  definite  con- 
clusion. Of  course,  some  very  important  phenomena  have 
taken  place.  The  most  significant,  perhaps,  is  the  develop- 
ment of  the  iron  and  steel  industry  in  the  eastern  parts  of 
France,  particularly  in  the  Department  Meurthe-et-Moselle. 
Something  very  similar  to  what  happened  in  the  steel  in- 
dustry of  the  United  States  is  happening  there ;  large  plants 
are  being  erected,  gigantic  industrial  combinations  are  be- 
ing formed,  labor  organizations  are  relentlessly  fought,  and 
foreign  workers  are  imported  from  Italy,  Belgium,  Luxem- 
bourg, Austria  and  other  countries.  Under  these  condi- 
tions, new  problems  are  thrust  upon  the  French  labor  move- 
ment, and  it  is  significant  that  the  Federation  of  the  metal 
workers  has  played  the  leading  part  in  the  recent  campaign 
against  the  "  anarchistic  "  tendencies  of  the  General  Con- 
federation of  Labor  and  has  demanded  a  return  to  the  plat- 


I2  PREFACE  TO  SECOND  EDITION  [242 

form  of  Amiens  (1906)  and  to  a  more  definite  program  of 
labor  demands.  This  does  not  mean  a  change  in  the  ideas 
of  French  syndicalisn,  but  it  certainly  indicates  a  tendency 
towards  the  more  positive  work  of  organization  and  of 
purely  trade  conquests. 

It  may  be  many  years,  before  the  struggle  of  tendencies 
in  the  General  Confederation  of  Labor  is  determined  either 
way.  Meanwhile,  the  significance  of  French  Syndicalism 
to  the  world  of  thought  and  action  has  become  greater  than 
it  was  before.  France  continues  to  present  both  the  ideas' 
and  activities  of  syndicalism  in  the  most  lucid  and  de- 
veloped form. 

This  fact,  I  take  it,  has  been  partly  responsible  for  the 
keen  interest  in  the  first  edition  of  this  book  and  for  the 
necessity  of  bringing  forth  a  second  edition. 

Louis  LEVINE. 
NEW  YORK  CITY,  MARCH,  1914. 


CONTENTS 


PAGE 

PREFACE  TO  FIRST  EDITION 5 

PREFACE  TO  SECOND  EDITION , 9 

INTRODUCTION,  by  Professor  Franklin  H.  Giddings 17 

CHAPTER  I 

THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  TO  THE  COMMUNE  (1789-1871) 

Legislation  of  French  Revolution  on  trade  associations;  law  le  Chapelier, 
1791 — Laws  of  Napoleon — Prohibition  of  strikes — Violation  of  these  laws 
— Secret  labor  organizations  in  France :  compagnonnages,  societies  of  re- 
sistance— Revolution  of  1848  and  the  cooperative  movement — Influence 
of  Louis  Blanc — Reaction  during  the  fifties — Revival  of  labor  movement 
in  1862— Effort  of  French  workingmen  to  break  legal  barriers — New  law 
on  strikes  in  1864 — Toleration  of  labor  unions  by  Government  of  Napoleon 
III — Syndicats  and  cooperation — Failure  of  cooperative  central  bank  in 
1868 — Communistic  and  Revolutionary  tendencies  in  "The  International" 
— Success  of  "The  International"  in  1869 — Franco-Prussian  War  and  its 
influence  on  the  French  labor  movement 19 

CHAPTER  II 

ORIGIN  OF  THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR  (1871-1895) 

The  influence  of  the  Commune  on  the  syndicats — Barberet  and  his  r61e  in 
the  syndical  movement  (1872-78) — The  first  Labor  Congress  in  France 
(1886) — Acceptance  of  the  Socialist  program  by  the  syndicats  at  the  con- 
gress of  Marseilles  (1879) — The  Socialist  groups  in  France:  Guesdists, 
Broussists,  Allemanists,  Blanquists,  Independents,  Anarchists — Their 
points  of  agreement  and  difference — Influence  of  socialist  divisions  on 
development  of  labor  organizations — Attempts  of  syndicats  to  form  a  cen- 
tral organization — The  National  Federation  of  Syndicats;  its  failure — The 
Bourse  du  Travail — The  Federation  of  Bourses  du  Travail — The  idea  of 
the  general  strike — Its  conception — Criticism  by  Guesdists — Split  in  Na- 
tional Federation  of  Syndicats — Formation  of  General  Confederation  of 
Labor  by  advocates  of  general  strike  and  opponents  of  Guesdists  ....  45 
243]  13 


14  CONTENTS  [244 

PAGE 

CHAPTER  III 
THE  FEDERATION  OF  BOURSES  DU  TRAVAIL 

Importance  of  Bourses  du  Travail;  their  rapid  growth — Municipal  and  gov- 
ernmental subventions — Program  of  Bourses  du  Travail — Federation  of 
Bourses  du  Travail  organized  in  1892 — Has  original  purpose — Fernand 
Pelloutier  Secretary  of  Federation — His  r&le  and  influence — Conception  of 
syndicat  as  the  cell  of  future  society — Growth  of  Federation  of  Bourses; 
its  relations  with  the  General  Federation  of  Labor 73 

CHAPTER  IV 
THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR  FROM  1895-1902 

Reasons  for  dividing  history  of  General  Confederation  into  two  periods — 
Weakness  of  Confederation  before  1902 — Congress  of  Tours  in  1896 — 
Discussion  of  the  idea  of  the  general  strike — Congress  of  Toulouse  in  1897 
— Discussion  of  sabotage  and  boycott  and  of  "  Direct  Action" — Congress 
of  Rennes  in  1898 — Congress  of  Paris  in  1900  and  of  Lyons  in  1901 — 
Revolutionary  character  of  Congress  of  Lyons:  New  conception  of  general 
strike;  revolutionary  character  of  syndicat;  anti-militaristic  ideas;  opposi- 
tion to  labor  legislation — Causes  of  revolutionary  ideas;  changes  in  the 
program  and  methods  of  socialist  parties;  Dreyfus  affair;  entrance  of 
socialist  Millerandinto  "bourgeois"  government — Congress  of  Montpellier 
in  1902  and  the  fusion  of  the  Federation  of  Bourses  du  Travail  with  the 
General  Confederation  of  Labor 91 

CHAPTER  V 
THE  DOCTRINE  OF  REVOLUTIONARY  SYNDICALISM 

Class  struggle,  its  meaning  and  importance — Syndicat  the  proper  organiza- 
tion for  carrying  on  class  struggle — Strength  of  syndicat  by  uniting  work- 
ingmen  without  distinction  of  race,  religion,  political  or  philosophical  ideas 
— Industrial  unionism  versus  Craft  unionism — Syndicats  and  "  Direct 
Action  " — Methods  of  "  Direct  Action :  "  strike,  boycott,  sabotage,  label — 
The  direct  struggle  against  the  State;  exclusion  of  parliamentary  methods 
— Criticism  of  democracy — Class  struggle  versus  co-operation  of  classes — 
Anti-patriotism — Anti-militarism — General  strike  the  means  of  emancipat- 
ing workingmen — The  ideal  society  of  the  syndicalists:  economic  federal- 
ism— The  r6le  of  the  "conscious  minority" — Syndicats  the  true  leaders  of 
the  working  class 123 


245] 


CONTENTS  !5 

PAGE 

CHAPTER  VI 

THE  THEORISTS  OF  REVOLUTIONARY  SYNDICALISM 

Two  groups  of  writers  on  syndicalism,   (a)  workingmen,   (3)  intellectuals  — 
Their  points  of  disagreement  —  Representative  of   intellectuals;    Georges    ^ 
Sorel  —  His   works  —  His   conception    of    syndicalism    as    neo-Marxism  — 
Fundamental  idea  of  Marx;  no  Utopias  —  Task  of  socialists  to  teach  work- 
ingmen —  The  importance  of  the  idea  of  the  general  strike  —  The  general 
strike  a   "social    myth"  —  What  is  a   "social  myth?"  —  Importance   of 
"social  myths"  in   revolutionary  movements  —  The  general   strike   as   a 
means  of  producing  a  complete  rupture  between  working  class  and  bour- 
geoisie —  Sorel's  theory  of  progress;   only  technical  progress  continuous;  * 
succession  of  cultures  not  continuous  —  Necessity  of  combating  democracy 

—  Democracy  —  the  regime  of  professional  politicians  who  rule  the  people 

—  Class  struggle  and  violence;  meaning  of  violence  —  General  strike  a  great 
moral  force  —  Syndicalist  ideas  founded  on  pessimistic  basis  —  Pessimism  as 
cause  of  great  historical  achievements  —  Ideas  of  Bergson  —  Criticism   of 
Sorel;   neo-Marxism  not  true  to  spirit  of  Marx  —  Lagardelle  and  his  writ- 
ings— Gustave  Herv£  and   ''La  Guerre  Sociale  "  —  Influence  of  Sorel  — 
Criticism  of  Prof.  Sombart's  views  —  Syndicalism  a  development  indepen- 
dent of  Sorel  —  Relation  of  syndicalism  to  other  social  theories  .....     141 


CHAPTER  VII 
THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR  SINCE  1902 

Constitution  of  General  Confederation  of  Labor  adopted  in  1902 — Activity 
of  General  Confederation — Movement  to  suppress  employment  bureaus — 
Congress  of  Bourges  in  1904 — Triumph  of  revolutionary  syndicalism — 
Movement  for  eight-hour  day  from  1904  to  1906 — Agitation  in  France — 
Fear  of  "social  revolution" — Government  arrests  leaders — Results  of 
strike  movement — Congress  of  Amiens  in  1906 — Struggle  between  revolu- 
tionaries and  reformists — Adoption  of  resolution  "  the  charter  of  syndical- 
ism " — Revolutionary  activity  of  Confederation  after  Congress  of  Amiens 
Demonstration  of  Villeneuve  St.  George  in  1908 — Collision  with  troops; 
killed  and  wounded;  arrest  of  syndicalist  leaders — Congress  of  Marseilles 
in  1908 — Congress  of  Toulonse  in  1910 — Congress  of  Havre  in  1912 — 
Growth  of  General  Confederation  of  Labor — The  demonstrations  of  the 
General  Confederation  against  war — The  "crisis"  of  revolutionary  syn- 
dicalism— Relations  of  General  Confederation  with  International  Secre- 
tariat of  Labor 162 


1 6  CONTENTS  [246 

PAGE 

CHAPTER  VIII 
CHARACTER  AND  CONDITIONS  OF  REVOLUTIONARY  SYNDICALISM 

Revolutionary  syndicalism  as  a  result  of  a  coalition  in  the  Confederation — 
The  parties  to  this  bloc :  anarchists,  revolutionary  socialists,  syndicalists — 
Formation  and  strength  of  the  bloc — The  socialist  ideal  of  a  free  workshop 
— Historical  traditions  and  the  revolutionary  spirit  in  French  workingmen 
— Causes  of  the  distrust  of  "politicians"  and  of  parliamentary  methods — 
The  antagonism  between  workingman  and  intellectual — Revolutionary 
syndicalists  not  a  minority  in  General  Confederation — Conditions  of  syndi- 
calism: poverty  of  French  syndicats;  psychology  of  French  workingmen 
— Syndicats  loosely  held  together — Weakness  as  cause  of  violent  methods 
— French  love  of  theory  and  of  formulas — Similar  actions  of  revolutionists 
and  reformists  in  Confederation  according  to  circumstances — Conditions 
necessary  for  realization  of  program  of  revolutionary  syndicalism — Outlook 
for  the  future 199 

BIBLIOGRAPHY •  •  • 223 


INTRODUCTION 

THE  democratic  social  movement  has  overleaped  its 
platform  and  escaped  out  of  the  hands  of  its  instigators. 
It  is  larger  than  any  school  of  ideas  and  will  not  be  bound 
by  any  program.  It  can  be  analyzed  in  part,  and  in  general 
terms  described,  but  it  can  no  longer  be  defined. 

Socialism  as  one  phase  of  this  unmanaged  and  unman- 
ageable tide,  has  itself  been  profoundly  affected  by  the 
magnitude,  the  complexity,  and  the  waywardness  of  the 
mass  motion.  It  now  has  its  "  Right  "  and  its  "  Left." 
There  is  a  conservative,  and  there  is  a  radical  socialism. 
Each  proclaims  the  class  struggle,  and  both  demand  the  col- 
lective ownership  of  the  chief  means  of  production.  But 
conservative  socialism  lays  stress  upon  collective  ownership, 
and  would  move  toward  it  by  peaceful,  evolutionary  steps. 
It  relies  on  the  ballot,  believes  in  legislation,  in  law,  and 
in  government ;  while  radical  socialism  proclaims  "  the 
revolution,''  plans  for  the  general  strike,  and  preaches  the 
expediency  of  sabotage  and  violence. 

At  first  sight  almost  identical  with  radical  socialism  is 
Syndicalism,  which,  however,  proves  upon  examination 
to  be  both  more  and  less  than  any  socialistic  program.  In 
its  most  characteristic  expression,  syndicalism  denies  the 
state  and  would  substitute  for  it  a  purely  voluntary  collec- 
tivism. So  far  it  is  at  one  with  anarchism,  and  there  are 
those  who  conceive  of  syndicalism  as  an  anarchistic  move- 
ment in  opposition  to  socialism.  The  trade-union  organiza- 
tion of  labor  the  world  over  is  looked  upon  by  the  syndicalist 
as  the  natural  basis  and  agency  of  his  enterprise,  quite  as 
existing  political  organizations  are  accepted  by  the  conser- 
vative or  parliamentary  socialist  as  the  best  preliminary 
norms  from  which  to  evolve  a  new  social  order. 

17 


1 8  INTRODUCTION  [248 

1 

In  this  division  of  the  forces  of  social  democracy  into 

right  and  left  groups  over  the  question  of  organization  and 
control,  we  have  a  significant  demonstration  of  the  inade- 
quacy of  that  Marxian  analysis  which  resolves  all  social 
conflict  into  the  antagonism  of  economic  classes.  More 
profound  than  that  antagonism,  and  in  the  order  of  time 
more  ancient,  is  the  unending  warfare  between  those  who 
believe  in  law  and  government  for  all,  and  those  who  be- 
lieve in  law  and  government  for  none.  The  more  or  less 
paradoxical  character  of  the  socialistic  movement  at  the 
present  moment  is  attributable  to  the  circumstance  that, 
for  the  time  being,  these  antagonistic  forces  of  socialism 
and  anarchism  are  confronting  a  common  enemy — the  in- 
dividualist, who  believes  in  law  and  government  for  every- 
body but  himself. 

To  describe,  explain  and  estimate  a  phenomenon  so  com- 
plex as  modern  revolutionary  syndicalism  is  a  task  from 
which  the  economist  and  the  historian  alike  might  well 
shrink.  To  understand  it  and  to  enable  readers  to  under- 
stand it  is  an  achievement.  I  think  that  I  am  not  speaking 
in  terms  of  exaggeration  in  saying  that  Dr.  Levine  has 
been  more  successful  in  this  arduous  undertaking  than  any 
predecessor.  His  pages  tell  us  in  a  clear  and  dispassionate 
way  what  revolutionary  syndicalism  is,  how  it  began,  and 
how  it  has  grown,  what  its  informing  ideas  and  purposes 
are,  and  by  what  methods  it  is  forcing  itself  upon  the  ser- 
ious attention  of  the  civilized  world.  I  think  that  it  is  a 
book  which  no  student  of  affairs  can  afford  to  overlook, 
or  to  read  in  any  other  spirit  than  that  of  a  sincere  desire 
to  know  what  account  of  the  most  profound  social  disturb- 
ance of  our  time  is  offered  by  a  competent  reporter  of  the 
facts. 

FRANKLIN  H.  GIDDINGS. 
COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY. 


CHAPTER  I 

THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  TO  THE  COMMUNE 
(1789-1871) 

THE  economic  legislation  of  the  French  Revolution  was 
guided  by  individualistic  ideas  which  expressed  the  inter- 
ests of  the  rising  middle  classes  who  felt  a  necessity  of 
removing  the  obstacles  in  the  way  of  economic  initiative 
and  of  personal  effort.  These  interests  and  ideas  dictated 
the  law  of  March  2-17,  1791,  which  abolished  the  guilds 
and  inaugurated  the  era  of  competition  in  France  (Lib- 
erte  du  Travail}.  The  law  declared  that  henceforth 
everybody  was  "  free  to  do  such  business,  exercise  such 
profession,  art,  or  trade,  as  he  may  choose."  * 

The  abolition  of  the  guilds  cleared  the  way  for  the  tech- 
nical changes  that  had  just  begun  and  the  development  of 
which  was  yet  in  the  future.  These  changes  may  be  sum- 
marized as  the  application  of  science  to  industry  and  the 
introduction  of  machinery.  The  process  went  on  in  France 
irregularly,  affecting  different  industries  and  different  local- 
ities in  various  degrees.  The  first  machine  (machine  a 
vapeur}  was  introduced  in  France  about  1815;  in  1830 
there  were  about  600  in  operation.  Some  idea  of  the  later 
changes  may  be  gained  from  the  following  table  giving  the 
number  of  machines  in  France  from  1839  to  1907: 

1  Les  Associations  Professionelles  Ouvricres,  Office  du  Travail 
(Paris,  1899),  vol.  i,  p.  7. 

249]  19 


20  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [250 

Year                           No.  of  Machines  Total  Horsepower 

1839  2,450  33,ooo 

1851  5,672  71,000 

1861  15,805  191,000 

1871  26,146  316,000 

1881  44,010  576,000 

1891  55,967  916,000 

1901  75,866  1,007,000 

1910  82,238  2,913,013  ! 

The  introduction  of  machinery  meant  the  absorption  of 
a  larger  part  of  the  population  in  industry,  the  concentration 
of  industry  in  a  smaller  number  of  establishments  and  the 
absolute  and  relative  increase  in  the  numbers  of  the  work- 
ing population  of  France. 

This  class  of  the  population  was  regulated  in  its  economic 
action  for  nearly  a  century  by  another  law  passed  June 
14-17,  1791,  and  known  by  the  name  of  its  author  as  the 
law  Le  Chapelier.  The  law  Le  Chapelier,  though  dictated 
by  the  same  general  interests  and  ideas  as  the  law  on  the 
guilds,  was  made  necessary  by  special  circumstances. 

The  abolition  of  the  guilds  had  as  one  of  its  effects  an 
agitation  among  the  journeymen  for  higher  wages  and  for 
better  conditions  of  employment.  During  the  summer  of 
1791,  Paris  was  the  scene  of  large  meetings  of  journey- 
men, at  which  matters  of  work  and  wages  were  discussed. 
The  movement  spread  from  trade  to  trade,  but  the  struggle 
was  particularly  acute  in  the  building  trades.  Profiting  by 
the  law  of  August  21,  1790,  which  gave  all  citizens  the 
"  right  to  assemble  peacefully  and  to  form  among  them- 
selves free  associations  subject  only  to  the  laws  which  all 
citizens  must  obey."  2  the  carpenters  formed  L' Union  f ra- 
ter nelle  des  ouz'riers  cu  I'art  de  la  charpentc,  an  associa- 

1  Annuaire  Statistique. 

2  Les  Associations  Professionelles,  vol.  i,  p.  8. 


25 1  ]      THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  TO  THE  COMMUNE          2\ 

tion  ostensibly  for  benevolent  purposes  only,  but  which  in 
reality  helped  the  carpenters  in  their  struggle  with  their 
masters.  The  masters  repeatedly  petitioned  the  munici- 
pality of  Paris  to  put  an  end  to  the  "  disorders,"  and  to  the 
"  tyranny  "  of  the  journeymen.  The  masters  complained 
that  a  general  coalition  of  80,000  workingmen  had  been 
formed  in  the  capital  and  that  the  agitation  was  spreading 
to  the  provincial  towns,1  The  municipal  authorities  tried 
to  meet  the  situation,  but  their  "  notices  "  and  "  decrees  " 
had  no  effect.  They  then  appealed  to  the  Constituent  As- 
sembly for  a  general  law  on  associations  and  combinations. 
The  result  was  the  [aw  Le  Chapel ier. 

The  report  by  which  the  bill  was  introduced  brought  out 
very  clearly  the  individualistic  ideas  by  which  the  legis- 
lators of  the  Revolution  were  inspired.  ''Citizens  of  certain 
trades,"  read  this  report,  "  must  not  be  permitted  to  as- 
semble for  their  pretended  common  interests.  There  is  no 
longer  any  corporation  (guild)  in  the  State;  there  is  but 
the  particular  interest  of  each  individual  and  the  general 
interest.  ..."  And  further,  "  Tt  is  necessary  to  abide  by 
the  principle  that  only  by  free  contracts,  between  individ- 
ual and  individual,  may  the  workday  for  each  workingman 
be  fixed :  it  is  then  for  the  workingman  to  maintain  the 
agreement  which  he  had  made  with  his  employer." 

The  law  identified  the  new  combinations  with  the  ancient 
guilds.  Its  first  clause  declared  that  "whereas  the  abolition 
of  all  kinds  of  corporations  of  citizens  of  the  same  estate 
(etat)  and  of  the  same  trade  is  one  of  the  fundamental 
bases  of  the  French  Constitution,  it  is  prohibited  to  re- 
establish them  de  facto  under  any  pretext  or  form  whatso- 
ever ".  The  second  clause  formulated  the  prohibition  to 

1  H.    Lagardelle,    L' Evolution    des    Syndifats    Ouvriers    en    France 
(Paris,  1901),  p.  13. 

2  Lcs  Associations  Professionelles,  vol.  i.  pp.  11-12. 


22  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [252 

form  trade  organizations  in  terms  which  left  nothing  to 
be  desired  in  clearness  and  precision.  It  read :  "  The  citi- 
zens of  the  same  estate  or  trade,  entrepreneurs,  those  who 
run  a  shop,  workingmen  in  any  trade  whatsoever,  shall  not, 
when  assembled  together,  nominate  presidents,  nor  secre- 
taries, nor  syndics,  shall  not  keep  any  records,  shall  not 
deliberate  nor  pass  resolutions  nor  form  any  regulations 
with  reference  to  their  pretended  common  interests."  The 
fourth  clause  declared  all  acts  contrary  to  this  law  uncon- 
stitutional, subject  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  police  tribu- 
nals, punishable  by  a  fine  of  500  limes  and  by  a  temporary 
suspension  of  active  rights  of  citizenship.  The  sixth  and 
seventh  clauses  determined  higher  penalties  in  cases  of 
menace  and  of  violence.  The  eighth  clause  prohibited  all 
"  gatherings  composed  of  artisans,  of  workingmen,  of  jour- 
neymen or  of  laborers,  or  instigated  by  them  and  directed 
against  the  free  exercise  of  industry  and  work  to  which 
all  sorts  of  persons  have  a  right  under  all  sorts  of  condi- 
tions agreed  upon  by  private  contract  (de  gre  a  gre)  ". 
"  Such  gatherings  are  declared  riotous,  are  to  be  dispersed 
by  force,  and  are  to  be  punished  with  all  the  severity  which 
the  law  permits."  x 

After  the  law  was  passed  by  the  Assembly,  the  author 
of  the  law,  Le  Chapelier,  added : 

I  have  heard  some  say  that  it  would  be  necessary  to  make  an 
exception  in  favor  of  the  Chambers  of  Commerce  in  cities. 
Certainly  you  understand  well  that  none  of  us  intend  to 
prevent  the  merchants  from  discussing  their  common  in- 
terests. I  therefore  propose  to  insert  into  the  proceedings 
the  following  clause :  "  The  National  Assembly,  considering 
that  the  law  which  it  has  just  passed  does  not  concern  the 
Chambers  of  Commerce,  passes  to  the  order  of  the  day." 

1  /  es  Associations  Professionelles,  vol.  i,  pp.  13-14. 


253]      THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  TO  THE  COMMUNE          23 

The  proposition  was  adopted.  "  This  last  vote,"  remarks 
the  official  historian  of  the  Office  du  Travail,  "  demonstrates 
sufficiently  that  the  law  was  especially  directed  against  the 
meetings,  associations  and  coalitions  of  workingmen."  * 

The  determination  to  prevent  collective  action  on  the 
part  of  the  workingmen  also  guided  the  legislative  activity 
of  Napoleon.  In  1803,  during  the  Consulate,  a  law  was 
passed  against  coalitions;  the  same  law  contained  a  pro- 
vision whereby  all  workingmen  were  to  have  a  special  cer- 
tificate (livret)  2  which  subjected  them  to  a  strict  surveil- 
lance of  the  police.  The  law  of  1803  against  coalitions  was 
replaced  in  1810  by  the  clauses  414-416  of  the  Penal  Code 
which  prohibited  and  punished  all  kinds  of  coalitions. 
These  articles  which  made  strikes  and  all  collective  action 
a  crime,  and  which  showed  clearly  discrimination  against 
workingmen,  were  as  follows  : 

Art.  414.  Any  coalition  among  those  who  employ  work- 
ingmen, tending  to  force  down  wages  unjustly  and  abusively, 
followed  by  an  attempt  or  a  commencement  of  execution,  shall 
be  punished  by  imprisonment  from  six  days  to  one  month  and 
by  a  fine  of  200  to  3,000  francs. 

Art.  415.  Any  coalition  on  the  part  of  the  workingmen  to 
cease  work  at  the  same  time,  to  forbid  work  in  a  shop,  to 
prevent  the  coming  or  leaving  before  or  after  certain  hours 
and,  in  general,  to  suspend,  hinder  or  make  dear  labor,  if  there 
has  been  an  attempt  or  a  beginning  of  execution,  shall  be  pun- 
ished by  imprisonment  of  one  month  to  three  months  maxi- 
mum ;  the  leaders  and  promoters  shall  be  punished  by  impris- 
onment of  two  to  five  years,  and  , 

Art.  416.  There  shall  also  be  subject  to  penalty  indicated 
in  the  preceding  article  and  according  to  the  same  distinctions, 

r  Les  Associations  Professionelles,  vol.  i,  p.  14. 

-  The  obligation  of  the  livret  was  abolished  in  1890.  G.  Weill,  His- 
toire  du  Movement  Social  en  France  (Paris,  1904),  p.  332. 


24  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [254 

those  workingmen  who  shall  have  declared  fines,  prohibitions, 
interdictions  and  any  other  proscriptions  under  the  name  of 
condemnations  and  under  any  qualification  whatsoever  against 
the  directors  of  the  shops  and  employers,  or  against  each  other. 
In  the  case  of  this  article  as  well  as  in  that  of  the  preceding, 
the  leaders  and  promoters  of  the  crime,  after  the  expiration 
of  their  fine,  may  be  made  subject  to  the  surveillance  of  the 
police  for  two  years  at  least  and  five  years  at  most.1 

The  prohibition  against  combination  and  organization 
was  aggravated  for  the  workingmen  by  articles  291-294  of 
the  Penal  Code  which  forbade  any  kind  of  associations  of 
more  than  twenty  persons.  These  articles  were  made  more 
stringent  by  the  Law  of  1834  which  prohibited  associa- 
tions even  of  twenty  persons,  if  they  were  branches  of  a 
larger  association.2 

/  The  workingmen,  however,  soon  began  to  feel  that  the 
Liberte  du  Travail  as  interpreted  by  the  laws  of  the 
country  put  them  at  a  disadvantage  in  the  struggle  for  ex- 
istence. Individually  each  one  of  them  was  too  weak  to 
obtain  the  best  bargain  from  his  employer.  This  was  notor- 
iously so  in  the  industries  in  which  machinery  was  making 
headway,  but  the  relations  between  employer  and  working- 
men  were  aggravated  by  competition  even  in  those  indus- 
tries where  the  old  conditions  of  trade  did  not  change  per- 
ceptibly for  some  time.  Competition  forced  the  employer 
to  become  a  "  calculator  above  everything  else  "  and  "  to 
consider  the  workingman  only  from  the  point  of  view  of 
the  real  value  which  his  hands  had  on  the  market  without 
heed  to  his  human  needs."  3  The  workingman,  on  the  other 

1  Les  Associations  Professionelles,  vol.  i,  pp.  18-19. 

2  Ibid.,  pp.  19-20,  and  p.  26. 

3  M.  Du  Cellier,  Histoire  des  Classes  Laborieuses  en  France  (Paris, 
1860),  p.  362. 


255]      THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  TO  THE  COMMUNE          2$ 

hand,  to  remedy  his  individual  helplessness  was  driven  to 
disregard  the  law  and  to  enter  into  combinations  with  his 
fellow-workers  for  concerted  action. 

The  figures  published  by  the  Department  of  Justice  give 
the  number  of  those  prosecuted  for  violating  the  law  on 
strikes — the  number  of  accused,  of  acquitted  and  of  con- 
demned. These  figures  are  incomplete.  They  give,  how- 
ever, some  idea  of  the  frequency  and  persistence  with  which 
the  workingmen  had  recourse  to  strikes  in  spite  of  the  law. 
The  figures  have  been  published  since  1825.  The  table  on 
the  next  page  gives  the  annual  figures  from  that  date  to 
1864,  when  a  new  law  on  strikes  was  passed. 

There  is  other  information  to  show  that  the  strikes  often 
assumed  the  character  of  a  general  movement,  particularly 
under  the  influence  of  political  disturbances.  During  the 
years  that  followed  the  Revolution  of  July  (1830)  the 
workingmen  of  France  were  at  times  in  a  state  of  agitation 
throughout  the  entire  country,  formulating  everywhere  par- 
ticular demands,  such  as  the  regulation  of  industrial 
matters,  collective  contracts  and  the  like.1 

In  many  cases,  the  strikes  were  spontaneous  outbursts  of 
discontent  among  unorganized  workingmen.  Frequently, 
however,  the  strikes  were  either  consciously  called  out  or 
directed  by  organizations  which  existed  by  avoiding  the 
law  in  various  ways. 

These  organizations  were  of  three  different  types:  the 
compagnonnagcs,  the  friendly  societies  (mutualites)  and 
the  "  societies  of  resistance  ". 

The  coinpagnonnages  originated  under  the  guild-sys- 
tem and  can  be  traced  back  as  far  as  the  fifteenth  cen- 
tury. Their  development  was  probably  connected  with  the 

1  Octave  Festy,  Lc  Movement  Ouvrier  au  Debut  de  la  Monarchic  de 
Juillet,  passim. 


26 


THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE 


[256 


Year 

Number  of  Cases 

Accused 

Acquitted 

Condemned  to 
Prison  for  One 
Year  or  More 

Condemned  to 
Prison  for  Less 
than  a  Year 

Condemned  to 
Pay  a  Fine 
Only 

1825  

Q2 

144. 

72 

i 

64 

7 

i«9A         

62 

nft 

l827  

4U 
2Q 

176 

ei 

3 

2 

13° 

74 

43 
tj 

Ig28  

28 

172 

84 

8; 

7 

1829  

I  7 

68 

26 

I 

70 

2 

1870  .  . 

4O 

206 

60, 

2 

I  7/1 

I 

1871  .  . 

4O 

7  06 

104 

27O 

17 

1872  .  . 

r  I 

2/1O 

85 

I 

I4O 

27 

187-2  .  . 

QO 

C22 

2l8 

27O 

27 

187/1  .  . 

ce 

/1IC 

I  CC 

227 

26 

l87C  .  . 

72 

278 

I 

IAI 

12 

1836  

ee 

772 

8? 

2°6 

10 

1877  .  . 

C.I 

7OO 

64. 

167 

64 

1838  

AA. 

266 

86 

I 

I7C. 

AA 

1870  .  . 

6a. 

AOQ 

116 

264, 

26 

1  840  •  

I7O 

682 

I  7O 

22 

476 

AC 

1841  

68 

787 

7O 

277 

67 

1842  

62 

771 

80 

2 

267 

26 

184.7  .  . 

AQ 

721 

77 

240 

8 

1  8/1/1  .  . 

C7 

298 

48 

2O  I 

4.0 

i84C  .  . 

4.8 

2O7 

O2 

778 

124. 

1846  

C7 

•y/ 

298 

/17 

2  2O 

71 

l847  .  . 

CC 

401 

66 

7OI 

72 

1848  

O4. 

560 

124 

2 

7QQ 

7C 

I  S  AQ  .  . 

6c 

74.1 

61 

I 

241 

42 

a.? 

72Q 

CO 

14 

182 

74 

i8c,i  

ce 

267 

77 

6 

IOO 

20 

1852  

86 

C72 

I  TO 

2 

706 

56 

I8C7  .  . 

log 

718 

IOC 

I 

C.7O 

82 

i8c./i  .  .            .... 

68 

71  C 

r  T 

I  7 

106 

ce 

i8cc  . 

1  68 

J*5 
1182 

117 

2/1 

OA7 

08 

10:>:>  
1856  

77 

/1C2 

11  / 

87 

260 

Q6 

i8e.7  .  . 

5c 

7OO 

77 

II 

2O4 

48 

1°57  

!gc8  

26Q 

7/1 

I 

2O  2 

72 

i8co  .  . 

5* 

28l 

2O 

227 

2Q 

1860  

S 

2O  7 

7A 

2  7O 

•3  -2 

1861  

67 

4O2 

78 

287 

41 

1862  

/i  /i 

706 

4.4. 

x 

IOO 

62 

1863  

20 

I7d 

17 

A-i 

74 

THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  TO  THE  COMMUNE 


27 


custom  of  traveling  which  became  prevalent  among  the 
journeymen  of  France  about  that  time.1  A  journeyman 
(called  coinpagnon  in  French)  would  usually  spend  some 
time  in  visiting  the  principal  cities  of  France  (make  his 
tour  dc  France)  to  perfect  himself  in  his  trade.  A  travel- 
ing compagnon  would  be  in  need  of  assistance  in  many 
cases  and  the  compagnonnages  owed  their  development  to 
the  necessity  of  meeting  this  want. 

The  compagnonnages  consisted  of  bachelor  journeymen 
only.  If  a  member  married  or  established  himself  as  mas- 
ter, he  left  the  compagnonnage.  Besides,  admission  to  the 
compagnonnage  was  dependent  on  tests  of  moral  character 
and  of  technical  skill.  Thus,  the  compagnonnages  always 
embraced  but  a  small  part  of  the  workingmen  —  the  elite 
from  the  technical  point  of  view.  To  attain  the  required 
technical  standard,  members  had  to  pass  some  time  as  as- 
pirants before  they  could  become  compagnons. 

The  organization  of  the  compagnonnages  was  very 
simple.  All  the  compagnons  of  the  same  trade  lived  to- 
gether in  one  house,  usually  in  an  inn,  kept  by  the  so-called 
mere  (mother)  or  pere  (father)  of  the  trade.  The  com- 
pagnons were  generally  the  only  boarders  in  the  house.  If 
not  numerous  enough  to  occupy  the  entire  house,  they  had 
one  hall  for  their  exclusive  occupation.  Here  they  held 
their  meetings,  initiated  new  members,  and  kept  their 
records  and  treasury.  Here,  also,  compagnons  arriving 
from  other  towns  made  themselves  "  recognized  "  by  special 
signs  and  symbols. 

All  the  compagnons  of  France  were  divided  among 
three  "  orders  "  called  devoirs.  The  devoirs  had  strange 
names  indicating  the  legends  with  which  the  origins  of 

1  Octave  Festy,  Le  Movement  Ouvrier  au  Debut  de  la  Monarchic  de 
France  (Paris,  1900),  vol.  i,  pp.  600  et  seq. 


28  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [258 

these  organizations  were  connected.  The  devoir,  "  Sons  of 
Master  Jack  "  (Enfants  de  Maitre  Jacques)  was  founded, 
according  to  the  story,  by  one  of  the  master-builders  of 
King  Solomon's  Temple.  The  "  Sons  of  Solomon  "  (En- 
fants de  Solomon'}  were  sure  that  their  order  was  founded 
by  King  Solomon  himself.  The  "Sons  of  Master  Soubise" 
regarded  another  builder  of  Solomon's  Temple  as  the 
founder  of  their  devoir.  Each  devoir  consisted  of  a  num- 
ber of  trades,  and  sometimes  one  and  the  same  trade  was 
divided  between  two  devoirs. 

Ceremonies  and  rites  constituted  an  inseparable  part  of 
the  compagnonnages.  The  initiation  of  a  new  member,  the 
"  recognition  "  of  a  newly  arrived  compagnon,  the  meet- 
ing of  two  traveling  compagnons  on  the  road,  etc.,  were 
occasions  for  strange  and  complicated  ceremonies  which 
had  to  be  accurately  performed.  These  ceremonies  were 
due  in  a  large  measure  to  the  secrecy  in  which  the  compag- 
nonnages developed  under  the  ancient  regime,  persecuted 
as  they  were  by  the  royal  authorities,  by  the  church,  and  by 
the  master-craftsmen. 

Within  the  compagnonnages  the  feeling  of  corporate  ex- 
clusiveness  and  the  idea  of  hierarchical  distinctions  were 
strong.  Emblems  of  distinction,  such  as  ribbons,  canes, 
etc.,  were  worn  on  solemn  occasions,  and  the  way  in  which 
they  were  worn,  or  their  number,  or  color,  indicated  the 
place  of  the  compagnonnage  within  the  whole  corporate 
body.  Many  riots  and  bloody  encounters  were  occasioned 
between  devoir  and  devoir  and  between  different  compag- 
nonnages within  each  devoir  by  disputes  over  "  ribbons  " 
and  other  emblems  appropriate  to  each.  For  instance,  the 
joiners  were  friends  of  the  carpenters  and  of  the  stone- 
cutters, but  were  enemies  of  the  smiths  whom  the  other  two 
trades  accepted.  The  smiths  rejected  the  harness-makers. 
The  blacksmiths  accepted  the  wheelwrights  on  condition 


2-9  ]   THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  TO  THE  COMMUNE    2g 

that  the  latter  wear  their  colors  in  a  low  buttonhole;  the 
wheelwrights  promised  but  did  not  keep  their  promise;  they 
wore  their  colors  as  high  as  the  blacksmiths ;  hence  hatred 
and  quarrels.  The  carpenters  wore  their  colors  in  their 
hats ;  the  winnowers  wanted  to  wear  them  in  the  same  way : 
that  was  enough  to  make  them  sworn  enemies.1  Besides. 
the  coinpagnonnagcs  did  not  strive  to  embrace  all  mem- 
bers of  the  same  trade  or  all  trades.  On  the  contrary,  they 
were  averse  to  initiating  a  new  trade  and  it  sometimes  took 
decades  before  a  new  trade  was  fully  admitted  into  the 
organization. 

While  these  features  harked  back  to  the  past,  the  economic 
functions  of  the  compagnonnages  anticipated  and  really 
were  a  primitive  form  of  the  later  syndicat.  The  compag- 
nonnages offered  effective  protection  to  the  compagnons  in 
hard  stresses  of  life  as  well  as  in  their  difficulties  with  their 
masters.  ''The  'devoir'  of  the  compagnons"  (read  the 
statutes  of  one  of  these  societies)  "  is  a  fraternal  alliance 
which  unites  us  all  by  the  sacred  ties  of  friendship,  the 
foundations  of  which  are :  virtue,  frankness,  honesty,  love 
of  labor,  courage,  assistance  and  fidelity."  These  abstract 
terms  translated  themselves  in  life  into  concrete  deeds  of 
mutual  aid  and  of  assistance  which  were  immensely  val- 
uable to  the  traveling  compagnons.  A  traveling  conipag- 
non,  on  arriving  at  a  city  or  town,  would  only  have  to  make 
himself  "  recognized  "  and  his  fellow-compagnons  would 
take  care  of  him.  He  would  be  given  lodging  and  food. 
Rinployment  would  be  found  for  him.  If  sick  or  in  dis- 
tress, he  would  receive  aid.  If  he  wished  to  leave  the  town 
to  continue  his  tour  dc  France,  he  would  be  assisted  and 
would  be  accompanied  some  distance  on  the  road. 

1  Les  Associations  Professionelles,  vol.  i,  p.  95. 

2  Maxiinc  Leroy.  Syndicats  et  Services  Publics  (Paris,  1909).  p.  12. 


30  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [26o 

With  their  simple  organization,  the  compagnons  were 
able  to  exert  a  strong  economic  influence.  They  served  as 
bureaus  of  employment.  One  compagnon,  elected  rouleur, 
was  charged  with  the  duty  of  finding  employment  for  com- 
pagnons and  "  aspirants  ".  He  kept  a  list  of  those  in  need 
of  work  and  placed  them  in  the  order  of  their  inscription. 
Usually  the  masters  themselves  addressed  the  rouleurs  for 
workingmen,  when  in  need  of  any. 

This  fact  gave  the  compagnonnages  a  control  over  the 
supply  of  labor.  They  could  withhold  labor  from  a  master 
who  did  not  comply  with  their  demands.  They  could  di- 
frect  their  members  into  other  towns  of  the  Tour  if  nec- 
'  essary,  as  everywhere  the  compagnons  would  find  friends 
and  protection.  They  could,  therefore,  organize  strikes 
and  boycott  a  master  or  workshop  for  long  periods  of  time. 
In  fact,  by  these  methods  the  compagnonnages  struggled 
for  higher  wages  and  better  conditions  of  employment  as 
far  back  as  the  sixteenth  century.  During  the  Great  Revo- 
lution the  compagnonnages  existed  in  twenty-seven  trades 
and  directed  the  strike-movement  described  above.  They 
attained  the  height  of  their  development  during  the  first 
quarter  of  the  nineteenth  century  when  they  were  the  only 
effective  workingmen's  organizations  exerting  an  influence 
in  the  economic  struggles  of  the  time. 

The  compagnonnages  persisted  in  several  trades  during 
the  larger  part  of  the  nineteenth  century.  After  1830,  how- 
ever, their  influence  declined.  The  new  industrial  condi- 
tions reduced  the  significance  of  the  personal  skill  of  the 
workingmen,  shifted  the  boundaries  of  the  ancient  trades, 
and  entirely  transformed  most  of  them.  The  rapid  devel- 
opment of  the  modern  means  of  communication  made  the 
tour  de  France  in  its  old  form  an  anachronism.  The  spread 
of  democratic  and  secular  ideas  brought  the  medieval  usages 
and  ideas  of  the  compagnonnages  into  disrepute  and  ridi- 


26i]      THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  TO  THE  COMMUNE          3! 

cule.  Several  attempts  to  reform  the  compagnonnages  and 
to  bring  them  into  harmony  with  the  new  conditions  of  life 
were  made  by  members  of  the  organization,  but  with  no 
results.1 

While  the  compagnonnages  were  reconstituting  them- 
selves during  the  Consulate  and  the  First  Empire,  another 
form  of  organization  began  to  develop  among  the  working- 
men.  This  was  the  friendly  or  benevolent  society  for 
mutual  aid  especially  in  cases  of  sickness,  accident  or  death. 
Several  such  societies  had  existed  before  the  Revolution 
and  the  law  Le  Chapelier  was  directed  also  against  them. 
"  It  is  the  business  of  the  nation,"  was  the  opinion  of  Le 
Chapelier,  accepted  by  the  Constituent  Assembly,  "  it  is  the 
business  of  the  public  officials  in  the  name  of  the  nation  to 
furnish  employment  to  those  in  need  of  it  and  assistance  to 
the  infirm  ".2  Friendly  societies,  however,  continued  to 
form  themselves  during  the  nineteenth  century.  They 
were  formed  generally  along  trade  lines,  embracing  mem- 
bers of  the  same  trade.  In  a  general  way  the  government 
did  not  hinder  their  development. 

Mrs.  Beatrice  Webb  and  Mr.  Sidney  Webb  have  shown 
that  a  friendly  society  has  often  been  the  nucleus  of  a  trade 
union  in  England.  In  France  the  friendly  societies  for  a 
long  time  played  the  part  of  trade  unions.  The  charge  of 
promoting  strikes  and  of  interfering  with  industrial  matters 
was  often  brought  against  them.3  There  were  132  such 
trade  organizations  in  Paris  in  1823  with  11,000  members, 
and  their  numbers  increased  during  the  following  years. 

The  form  of  organization  called  into  being  by  the  new 

1  On  the  compagnonnage  see,  J.  Connay,  Le  Compagnonnage,  1909; 

E.  Martin  St.  Leon,  Le  Compagnonnage,  1901 ;  Agricol  Perdigiuer,  Le 
Livre  du  Compagnonnage,  1841. 

-  Les  Assoc.  Profess.,  vol.  i,  p.  193.  3  Ibid.,  p.  199. 


32  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [262 

economic  conditions  was  the  societe  de  resistance,  an  or- 
ganization primarily  designed  for  the  purpose  of  exercising 
control  over  conditions  of  employment.  These  societies  of 
resistance  assumed  various  names.  They  usually  had  no 
benefit  features  or  passed  them  over  lightly  in  their  statutes. 
They  emphasized  the  purpose  of  obtaining  collective  con- 
tracts, scales  of  wages,  and  general  improvements  in  con- 
ditions of  employment.  These  societies  were  all  secret,  but 
free  from  the  religious  and  ceremonial  characteristics  of  the 
co  mpagnonnages. 

One  of  the  most  famous  of  these  societies  in  the  history 
of  the  French  working-class  was  the  Devoir  Mutuel, 
founded  by  the  weavers  of  Lyons,  in  1823.  This  society 
directed  the  famous  strikes  of  the  weavers  in  1831  and 
1834.  Its  aim,  as  formulated  in  its  statutes,  was:  first,  to 
practice  the  principles  of  equity ;  second,  to  unite  the  weav- 
ers' efforts  in  order  to  obtain  a  reasonable  wage  for  their 
labor;  third,  to  do  away  with  the  abuses  of  the  factory,  and 
to  bring  about  other  improvements  in  "the  moral  and  phy- 
sical condition  "  of  its  members.  The  society  had  3,000 
members  in  183  3.* 

In  1833  the  smelters  of  copper  in  Paris  formed  them- 
selves into  a  society  which  was  to  help  them  in  their  re- 
sistance against  employers.  Two  francs  a  day  was  to  be 
paid  to  every  member  who  lost  employment  because  he 
did  not  consent  to  an  unjust  reduction  in  his  wages  or  for 
any  other  reason  which  might  be  regarded  as  having  in 
view  the  support  of  the  trade;  in  other  cases  of  unemploy- 
ment, no  benefit  was  allowed,  in  view  of  the  fact  that  in 
ordinary  times  the  smelters  were  seldom  idle.2  The  society 
was  open  to  all  smelters,  without  any  limitation  of  age;  it 

1  Les  Associations  Professionelles,  vol.  i,  pp.  201-203. 

2  Ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  204. 


263]      THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  TO  THE  COMMUNE          33 

was  administered  by  a  council  assisted  by  a  commission  of 
representatives  from  the  shops,  elected  by  the  members  of 
the  society  of  each  shop.  The  society  was  soon  deprived, 
however,  of  its  combative  character  by  the  government.1 

A  strong  society  of  resistance  was  organized  by  the 
printers  of  Paris  in  1839.  Though  secret,  it  gained  the  ad- 
herence of  a  large  part  of  the  trade.  In  1848  it  had  1,200 
members — half  of  all  the  printers  at  that  time  in  Paris. 
It  was  administered  by  a  committee.  Through  its  initiative 
a  mixed  commission  of  employers  and  workingmen  was 
organized  which  adopted  a  general  scale  of  wages.  This 
commission  also  acted  as  a  board  of  mediation  and 
conciliation  in  disputes  between  employers  and  working- 
men.2 

The  compagnonnages,  inntualitcs  and  resistance-societies 
aimed  partly  or  exclusively  to  better  conditions  of  employ- 
ment by  exerting  pressure  upon  employers.  These  societies 
reveal  the  efforts  that  were  being  made  by  workingmen  to 
adjust  themselves  to  the  economic  conditions  of  the  time. 
But  after  1830,  other  ideas  began  to  find  adherents  among 
the  French  workingmen ;  namely,  the  ideas  of  opposition 
to  the  entire  economic  regime  based  on  private  property 
and  the  idea  of  substituting  for  this  system  a  new  indus- 
trial organization. 

The  history  of  the  socialist  movement  of  France  before 
1848  can  not  here  be  entered  into.  It  has  been  written  and 
rewritten  and  is  more  or  less  known.  For  the  purposes  of 
this  study,  it  is  only  necessary  to  point  out  that  during 
this  period,  and  particularly  during  the  revolutionary 
period  of  1848,  the  idea  of  co-operation,  as  a  means  of 

1  Les  Associations  Professioiielles,  vol.  i,  p.  204. 

2  Ibid.,  pp.  205-6. 


34  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  '  [264 

abolishing  the  wage  system,  made  a  deep  impression  upon 
the  minds  of  French  workingmen.1 

The  idea  of  co-operation  had  been  propagated  before 
1848  by  the  Saint-Simonists  and  Fourierists,  and  particu- 
larly by  Buchez  who  had  outlined  a  clear  plan  of  co-opera- 
tion in  his  paper  L'Europeen  in  1831-2.  Similar  ideas  were 
advanced  during  the  forties  by  a  group  of  workingmen  who 
published  L' Atelier.  But  only  with  the  outbreak  of  the 
Revolution  of  1848,  and  under  the  influence  of  Louis  Blanc, 
did  the  co-operative  idea  really  become  popular  with  the 
workingmen.  Between  1848  and  1850  the  enthusiasm  for 
co-operative  societies  was  great,  and  a  considerable  number 
of  them  were  formed.  On  July  6,  1848,  the  Constituent  As- 
sembly voted  a  loan  of  3,000,000  francs  for  co-operative 
societies,  and  this  sum  was  divided  among  26  societies  in 
Paris  and  36  in  the  provinces.2  But  the  number  of  those 
founded  without  assistance  was  much  greater ;  about  300  in 
Paris  and  many  more  in  the  provinces.  Of  these  societies 
most  perished  within  a  short  time  while  the  rest  were  dis- 
solved by  the  administration  of  Napoleon  III  after  the  coup- 
el' etat  of  185 1.3 

The  Revolution  of  1848  was  an  important  moment  in 
the  history  of  the  French  working-class.  Though  the 
socialist  idea  of  the  "  Organization  of  Work  "  (L'Organi- 
sation  du  Travail}  which  was  so  prominent  during  the 
Revolution  passed  into  history  after  the  days  of  June,  it 
left  an  impression  upon  the  minds  of  French  workingmen. 
The  belief  in  a  possible  social  transformation  became  a  tra- 

1  On  the  history  of  French  socialism :  R.  T.  Ely,  French  and  German 
Socialism    (1878)  ;   Th.  Kirkup,   A   History   of  Socialism    (1906)  ;    G. 
Isambert,  Les  Idees  Socialistes  en  France   (1905)  ;  P.  Louis,  Histoire 
du  Socialisme  Francois  (1901). 

2  Georges  Renard,  La  Republique  de  1848. 

8  Albert  Thomas,  Le  Second  Empire  (Paris,  1907). 


265] 


THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  TO  THE  COMMUNE 


dition  with  them.  Besides,  the  Revolution  gave  a  strong 
impulse  to  purely  trade  organizations  such  as  the  societes 
de  resistance.  Before  1848  they  had  existed  in  a  few  trades 
only.  The  period  of  the  Revolution  witnessed  the  for- 
mation of  a  large  number  of  them  in  various  trades  and 
strengthened  the  tendency  towards  organization  which  had 
manifested  itself  before. 

During  the  first  decade  of  the  Second  Empire  all  work- 
ingmen's  organizations  were  presecuted;  most  of  them  per- 
ished; others  went  again  into  secrecy  or  disguised  them- 
selves as  mutual  aid  societies. 

With  the  advent  of  the  second  decade  of  the  Empire  the 
labor  movement  acquired  an  amplitude  it  had  never  had 
before.  Its  main  characteristic  during  this  period  was  a 
decided  effort  to  break  the  legal  barriers  in  its  way  and  to 
come  out  into  the  open.  The  workingmen's  chief  demands 
were  the  abolition  of  the  law  on  coalitions  and  the  right 
to  organize. 

The  workingmen  were  given  an  opportunity  to  express 
their  views  and  sentiments  on  occasions  of  National  and 
International  Exhibitions.  It  had  become  a  custom  in 
France  to  send  delegations  of  workingmen  to  such  exhibi- 
tions. In  1849  the-  Chamber  of  Commerce  of  Lyons  sent  a 
delegation  oi  workingmen  to  the  National  Exhibition  in 
Paris.  In  1851  the  municipality  of  Paris  sent  some  work- 
ingmen to  the  International  Exhibition  in  London.  A  dele- 
gation was  sent  again  to  London  in  1862  and  to  Paris  in 
1867. 

The  workingmen-delegates  published  reports  in  which 
they  formulated  their  views  on  the  condition  of  their  re- 
spective trades  and  expressed  their  demands  and  aspira- 
tions. These  reports  have  been  called  the  cahiers  of  the 
working-class.  The  authors  of  the  reports  —  workingmen 
themselves,  elected  by  large  numbers  of  workingmen  —  were 


36  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [266 

representatives  in  the  true  sense  of  the  term  and  voiced  the 
sentiments  and  ideas  of  a  large  part  of  the  French  work- 
ingmen of  their  time. 

The  reports  published  by  the  delegates  of  1862  contain 
a.  persistent  demand  for  freedom  to  combine  and  to  or- 
ganize. The  refrain  of  all  the  reports  is :  "  Isolation  kills 
us  "/  The  trade  unions  of  England  made  a  deep  impres- 
sion on  the  French  delegates  and  strengthened  their  con- 
viction of  the  necessity  of  organization.  "  Of  53  reports 
emanating  from  183  delegates  of  Paris,  38  by  145  delegates 
express  the  desire  that  syndical  chambers  be  organized  in 
their  trades."  1 

The  government  of  the  Empire,  which  hoped  to  interest 
the  workingmen  in  its  existence,  gave  way  before  their 
persistent  demands.  In  1864,  in  consequence  of  a  strike 
of  Parisian  printers  which  attracted  much  public  attention, 
the  old  law  on  coalitions  was  abolished  and  the  right  to 
strike  granted. 

The  right  to  strike,  however,  was  bound  up  with  certain 
other  rights  which  the  French  workingmen  were  still  de- 
nied. Unless  the  latter  had  the  right  to  assemble  and  to 
organize,  they  could  profit  but  little  by  the  new  law  on 
coalitions.  Besides,  the  French  workingmen  were  gener- 
ally averse  to  strikes.  The  reports  of  1862,  though  demand- 
ing the  freedom  of  coalition,  declared  that  it  was  not  the 
intention  of  the  workingmen  to  make  strikes  their  habitual 
procedure.  The  delegates  of  1867,  who  formed  a  commis- 
sion which  met  in  Paris  for  two  years,  discussing  all  the 
economic  problems  that  interested  the  workingmen  of  the 
time,  were  of  the  same  opinion.  A  special  session  of  the 
Commission  was  devoted  to  the  consideration  of  the  means 
by  which  strikes  might  be  avoided.  All  agreed  that,  as  one 

1  G.  Weill,  op.  cit.,  pp.  63-65. 


267]      THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  TO  THE  COMMUNE          37 

of  the  delegates  expressed  it,  strikes  were  "the  misery  of  the 
workingmen  and  the  ruin  of  the  employer  "  1  and  should 
be  resorted  to  only  in  cases  of  absolute  necessity.  What 
the  delegates  demanded  was  the  right  to  organize  and  to 
form  "  syndical  chambers  ".  They  hoped  that  with  the 
help  of  these  organizations,  they  would  avoid  strikes  and 
improve  their  economic  condition. 

In  the  beginning  of  1868,  a  number  of  delegates  to  the 
Exhibition  of  1867  were  received  by  the  Minister  of  Agri- 
culture, Commerce  and  Public  Works  to  present  their 
views  and  demands.  The  vice-president  of  the  Commis- 
sion, M.  Parent,  indicated  clearly  what  the  workingmen 
meant  by  "  syndical  chambers  "  in  the  following  words : 

We  all  agree  to  proceed  by  way  of  conciliation,  but  we  all  have 
also  recognized  the  necessity  of  guaranteeing  our  rights  by  a 
serious  organization  which  should  give  the  workingmen  the 
possibility  of  entering  easily  and  without  fear  into  agreement 
with  the  employers.  ...  It  is  thus  in  order  to  avoid  strikes, 
guaranteeing  at  the  same  time  the  wages  of  the  workingmen, 
that  the  delegates  of  1867  solicit  the  authorization  to  establish 
syndicats  in  each  trade  in  order  to  counter-balance  the  for- 
midable organization  of  the  syndical  chambers  of  the  mer- 
chants and  manufacturers.  .  .  .  The  workingmen's  syndical 
chambers,  composed  of  syndics  elected  by  the  votes  of  the 
workingmen  of  their  trade,  would  have  an  important  role  to 
fulfil.  Besides  the  competent  experts  which  they  could  always 
furnish  for  the  cases  subject  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
prud'hommes,  for  justices  of  the  peace  and  for  the  tribunals 
of  Commerce,  they  could  furnish  arbiters  for  those  conflicts 
which  have  not  for  their  cause  an  increase  in  wages.  Such 
are :  the  regulations  of  the  workshops,  the  use  of  health  en- 
dangering materials,  the  bad  condition  of  the  machinery  and 

1  Commission    Ottrricrc   dc    1867,    Rccucil   dcs   Froccs-i'crbaiix,    vol. 
i,  p.  28. 


33 


THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [268 


of  the  factory  which  affect  the  health  of  the  workingmen  and 
often  endanger  their  lives,  the  protection  of  the  inventions 
made  by  workingmen,  the  organization  of  mutual  and  pro- 
fessional education,  which  cannot  be  entirely  instituted  with- 
out the  help  of  the  men  of  the  workshop,  etc.1  y 

On  the  30th  of  March,  1868,  the  Minister  of  Com- 
merce and  Public  Works  announced  that  without  modify- 
ing the  law  on  coalitions,  the  government  would  henceforth 
tolerate  workingmen's  organizations  on  the  same  grounds 
on  which  it  had  heretofore  tolerated  the  organizations  of 
employers.  With  this  act  began  the  period  of  toleration 
which  lasted  down  to  1884,  when  the  workingmen's  or- 
ganizations were  brought  under  the  protection  of  a  special 
law. 

The  declaration  of  toleration  gave  free  scope  to  the 
workingmen  to  form  their  syndical  chambers.  Some  syn- 
dicats  had  been  openly  formed  before.  In  1867,  the  shoe- 
makers had  formed  a  society — the  first  to  bear  the  name  of 
syndicat — which  had  openly  declared  that  it  would  support 
members  on  strike  and  would  try  to  defend  and  to  raise 
wages.  But  only  after  the  declaration  of  the  government 
in  1868  did  these  societies  begin  to  increase  in  numbers. 

While  organizing  for  resistance,  the  workingmen  during 
this  period,  however,  placed  their  main  hopes'^m  .co-opera- 
tion; the  co-operative  society  of  production  was  to  them 
the  only  means  of  solving  the  labor  question.  As  one  of 
the  delegates  to  the  Workingmen's  Commission  of  1867 
put  it:  "  Salvation  is  in  association  "  (Le  salut  c'est  I'asso- 
ciation).2  The  main  function  of  the  syndical  chamber  was 
to  promote  the  organization  of  co-operative  societies. 

The  revival  of  enthusiasm  for  co-operative  societies  began 

1  Lagardelle,  Evolution  des  Syndicats,  pp.  218-9. 

2  Commission  Ouvriere  de  1867,  vol.  i,  p.  28. 


269]      TIIE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  TO  THE  COMMUNE          39 

in  1863.  Men  of  different  political  and  economic  views 
helped  the  movement.  It  found  supporters  in  liberal  econo- 
mists, like  M.  Say  and  M.  Walras;  it  was  seconded  by 
Proudhon  and  his  followers,  while  a  number  of  commu- 
nists took  an  active  part  in  it.  Profiting  by  the  experience 
of  1848-50,  the  workingmen  now  adopted  a  new  plan. 
The  co-operative  society  of  production  was  to  be  the  crown- 
ing part  of  the  work,  resting  upon  a  foundation  of  several 
other  organizations.  First  the  members  of  one  and  the 
same  trade  were  to  form  a  syndical  chamber  of  their  trade. 
The  syndical  chamber  was  to  encourage  the  creation  of  a 
"  society  of  credit  and  savings  "  which  should  have  for  its 
aim  the  collection  of  funds  by  regular  dues  paid  by  the 
members.  Such  "  societies  of  credit  and  savings  "  began 
to  develop  after  1860,  and  they  were  considered  very  im- 
portant; not  only  because  they  provided  the  funds,  but 
also  and  mainly  because  they  helped  the  members  to  become 
acquainted  with  one  another  and  to  eliminate  the  inefficient. 
With  a  society  of  credit  in  existence,  it  was  deemed  nec- 
essary to  create  a  co-operative  of  consumption.  The  pro- 
ductive co-operative  society  was  to  complete  this  series  of 
organizations  which,  supporting  one  another,  were  to  give 
stability  to  the  entire  structure. 

The  plan  was  seldom  carried  out  in  full.  Co-operatives 
of  production  were  formed  without  any  such  elaborate 
preparation  as  outlined  above.  However,  many  "  societies 
of  credit  and  saving  "  were  formed.  In  1863  there  were 
200  of  them  in  Paris;  and  in  September,  1863,  a  central 
bank,  La  Socictc  du  Credit  an  Travail  was  organized. 
Similar  central  banks  were  formed  in  Lyons,  Marseilles, 
Lille  and  other  large  cities. 

In  Paris  the  Credit  an  Travail  became  the  center  of  the 
co-operative  movement  between  1863  and  1868.  It  subsi- 
dized successively  L' Association  (Nov.,  i864-July,  1866) 


40  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [270 

and  La  Co-operation  (Sept.,  i866-Feb.,  1867) — magazines 
devoted  to  the  spread  of  co-operative  ideas.  It  gave  advice 
and  information  for  forming  co-operatives.  Most  of  the 
co-operative  enterprises  of  the  period  were  planned  and 
first  elaborated  in  the  councils  of  this  society.  Finally  it 
furnished  the  co-operatives  with  credit.  Its  business  done 

in  1866  amounted  to  10^2  million  francs.1 

' 

In  1868  the  co-operative  movement,  after  several  years 
of  development,  suffered  a  terrible  blow.  On  November 
2nd,  the  Credit  au  Travail  became  bankrupt;  it  had  im- 
mobilized its  capital,  and  had  given  out  loans  for  too  long 
periods,  while  some  of  the  other  loans  were  not  reim- 
bursed. The  bank  had  to  suspend  payment  and  was  closed. 
The  disaster  for  the  co-operative  movement  was  complete. 
The  Credit  au  Travail  seemed  to  incarnate  the  co-operative 
movement ;  "  and  its  failure  made  many  think  that  the  co- 
operative institution  had  no  future  ".2 

The  failure  of  the  co-operative  movement  turned  the 
efforts  of  the  workingmen  into  other  channels.  They  now 
began  to  join  the  "  International  Association  of  Working- 
men  "  in  increased  numbers  and  to  change  their  ideas  and 
methods. 

The  "  International  ",  as  is  well  known,  was  formed  in 
1864  by  French  and  English  workingmen.  The  French 
section,  during  the  first  years  of  its  existence,  was  com- 
posed mainly  of  the  followers  of  Proudhon,  known  as  mu- 
tuellistes.  The  program  of  the  mutitellistes  was  a  peaceful 
change  in  social  relations  by  which  the  idea  of  justice — con- 
ceived as  reciprocity  or  mutuality  of  services — would  be 
realized.  The  means  advocated  were  education  and  the 
organization  of  mutual  aid  societies,  of  mutual  insurance 

1  P.  Hubert- Valleroux,  La  Cooperation  (Paris,  1904),  pp.  14-17. 

2  P.  Hubert-Valleroux,  op.  cit.,  p.  16. 


271]      THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  TO  THE  COMMUNE          41 

companies,  of  synclicats,  of  co-operative  societies  and  the 
like.  Much  importance  was  attached  to  the  organization 
of  mutual  credit  societies  and  of  popular  banks.  It  was 
hoped  that  with  the  help  of  cheap  credit  the  means  of  pro- 
duction would  be  put  at  the  disposal  of  all  and  that  co- 
operative societies  of  production  could  then  be  organized 
in  large  numbers.  The  Mutnellistes  emphasized  the  idea 
that  the  social  emancipation  of  the  workingmen  must  be 
the  work  of  the  workingmen  themselves.  They  were  op- 
posed to  state  intervention.  Their  ideal  was  a  decen- 
tralized economic  society  based  upon  a  new  principle  of 
right — the  principle  of  mutuality — which  was  "  the  idea  of 
the  working-class  ".*  Their  spokesman  and  master  was 
Proudhon  who  formulated  the  ideas  of  mutucllisme  in  his 
work,  DC  la  Capacitc  Politique  des  Classes  Ouvrieres. 

Between  1864  and  1868,  the  "  International  "  met  with 
little  success  in  France.  The  largest  number  of  adherents 
obtained  by  it  during  this  period  was  from  five  to  eight 
hundred.  Persecuted  by  the  government  after  1867,  it  was 
practically  dead  in  France  in  i868.2  But  in  1869  it  re- 
appeared with  renewed  strength  under  the  leadership  of 
men  of  collectivist  and  communist  ideas,  which  were  partly 
a  revival  and  survival  of  the  ideas  of  1848,  partly  a  new  de- 
velopment in  socialist  thought. 

One  current  of  communist  ideas  was  represented  by  the 
Blanquists.  Blanqui,  a  life-long  conspirator  and  an  ardent 
republican  who  had  been  the  leader  of  the  secret  revolu- 
tionary societies  under  the  Monarchy  of  July,  took  up  his 
revolutionary  activity  again  during  the  latter  part  of  the 
Second  Empire.  A  republican  and  revolutionary  above 
everything  else,  he  had,  however,  gradually  come  to  for- 

1  P.   J.    Proudhon,   De   la   Cafiacite   Politique   des   Classes    Ouvicres 
(Paris,  1865),  p.  59. 

2  A.  Thomas,  Le  Second  Empire,  p.  332. 


42  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [272 

mulate  in  a  more  precise  way  a  communistic  program,  to 
be  realized  by  his  party  when  by  a  revolutionary  upheaval 
it  would  be  carried  into  power.  The  Blanquists  de- 
nounced the  "  co-operators  "  and  th'e  "  mutuellistes  "  and 
called  upon  the  workingmen  to  organize  into  secret  societies 
ready,  at  a  favorable  moment,  to  seize  political  power. 
Towards  the  end  of  the  Second  Empire,  the  Blanquists 
numbered  about  2,500  members  in  Paris,  mainly  among  the 
Republican  youth.1 

The  other  current  of  communist  ideas  had  its  fountain- 
head  in  the  "  International  "  which  Caesar  de-Paepe,  Marx 
•and  Bakounine  succeeded  in  winning  over  to  their  collec- 
tivist  ideas.  The  congresses  of  the  "  Association  "  in  Brus- 
sels in  1868  and  in  Bale  in  1869  adopted  resolutions  of  a 
collectivist  character,  and  many  members  of  the  French  sec- 
tion were  won  over  to  the  new  ideas.2 

The  success  of  the  "  International  "  in  France  in  1869 
was  the  sudden  result  of  the  strike-movement  which  swept 
the  country  during  the  last  years  of  the  Second  Empire. 
The  members  of  the  "  International  "  succeeded  in  obtain- 
ing financial  support  for  some  strikers.  This  raised  the 
prestige  of  the  "  Association  ",  and  a  number  of  syndicats 
sent  in  their  collective  adhesion.  It  is  estimated  that 
toward  the  end  of  1869  the  "  International  "  had  a  mem- 
bership of  about  250,000  in  France. 

These  facts  had  their  influence  on  the  French  leaders  of 
the  "  International  ".  They  changed  their  attitude  toward 
the  strike,  declaring  it  "  the  means  par  excellence  for  the 
organization  of  the  revolutionary  forces  of  labor  ".3  The 
idea  of  the  general  strike  suggested  itself  to  others.4  At 

1  A.  Thomas,  op.  cit.,  p.  332. 

2  E.    E.    Fribourg,    L' Association    Internationale    des    Travailleurs 
(Paris,  1871). 

3  A.  Thomas,  op.  cit.,  p.  363.  4  Ibid.,  p.  358. 


273]      THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  TO  THE  COMMUNE          43 

the  Congress  of  Bale  in  1869,  one  of  the  French  delegates 
advocated  the  necessity  of  organizing  syndicats  for  :wo> 
reasons :  first,  because  "  they  are  the  means  of  resisting  the 
exploitation  of  capital  in  the  present;"  and  second,  because 
"  the  grouping  of  different  trades  in  the  city  will  form  the 
commune  of  the  future  "...  and  then  ..."  the  gov- 
ernment will  be  replaced  by  federated  councils  of  syndicats 
and  by  a  committee  of  their  respective  delegates  regulating 
the  relations  of  labor — this  taking  the  place  of  politics."  x 

Under  the  influence  of  the  "  International  "  the  syndi- 
cats of  Paris — there  were  about  70  during  the  years  1868- 
1870 — founded  a  local  federation  under  the  name  of  Cham- 
bre  Federalc  des  societcs  ouvrieres  de  Paris.  This  federa- 
tion formulated  its  aim  in  the  following  terms: 

This  agreement  has  for  its  object  to  put  into  operation  the 
means  recognized  as  just  by  the  workingmen  of  all  trades  for 
the  purpose  of  making  them  the  possessors  of  all  the  instru- 
ments of  production  and  to  lend  them  money,  in  order  that  they 
may  free  themselves  from  the  arbitrariness  of  the  employer 
and  from  the  exigencies  of  capital.  .  .  .  The  federation  has 
also  the  aim  of  assuring  to  all  adhering  societies  on  strike  the 
moral  and  material  support  of  the  other  groups  by  means  of 
loans  at  the  risk  of  the  loaning  societies.2 

These  organizations  were  entirely  swept  away  by  the 
events  of  1870-71 :  the  Franco-Prussian  War,  the  Procla- 
mation of  the  Republic,  and  especially  the  Commune. 
After  1871  the  workingmen  had  to  begin  the  work  of  or- 
ganization all  over  again.  But  the  conquests  of  the  pre- 
vious period  were  not  lost.  The  right  to  strike  was  recog- 
nized. The  policy  of  tolerating  workingmen's  organiza- 

1  James  Guillaume,  L' Internationale,  Documents  et  Souvenirs  (Paris, 
1905),  vol.  i,  p.  205. 

2  A.  Thomas,  op.  fit.,  p.  352. 


44  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [274 

tions  was  continued,  notwithstanding  a  few  acts  to  the 
contrary.  But,  above  all,  the  experience  of  the  working- 
men  was  preserved.  The  form  of  organization  which  they 
generally  advocated  after  the  Commune  was  the  syndicat. 
The  other  forms  (i.  e.,  the  Compagnonnages  and  the 
secret  Societe  de  resistance}  either  disappeared  or  devel- 
oped independently  along  different  lines,  as  the  friendly 
societies. 

In  other  respects,  the  continuity  of  the  labor  move- 
ment after  the  Commune  with  that  of  the  preceding  period 
was  no  less  evident.  As  will  be  seen  in  the  following  chapter 
the  problems  raised  and  the  solutions  given  to  them  by  the 
French  workingmen  for  some  time  after  the  Commune 
were  directly  related  to  the  movement  of  the  Second  Em- 
pire. The  idea  of  co-operation,  the  mutuellisme  of  Proud- 
hon,  and  the  collectivism  of  the  "  International "  reap- 
peared in  the  labor  movement  under  the  Third  Republic. 


CHAPTER  II 

ORIGIN  OF  THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR. 
(1872-1895) 

THE  vigorous  suppression  of  the  Commune  and  the 
political  events  which  followed  it  threw  the  French  work- 
ingmen  for  some  time  into  a  state  of  mental  depression. 
Though  trade-union  meetings  were  not  prohibited,  the 
workingmen  avoided  the  places  which  had  been  centers  of 
syndical  activity  before  the  Commune.  Full  of  suspicion 
and  fear,  they  preferred  to  remain  in  isolation  rather  than 
to  risk  the  persecution  of  the  government. 

Under  these  conditions,  the  initiative  in  reconstituting 
the  syndicats  was  taken  by  a  republican  journalist,  Bar- 
beret.1  Barberet  was  prompted  to  undertake  this  "  hon- 
orable task  "  by  the  desire  to  do  away  with  strikes.  He 
had  observed  the  strike  movement  for  some  years,  and  had 
come  to  the  conclusion  that  strikes  were  fatal  to  the  work- 
ingmen and  dangerous  to  the  political  institutions  of  the 
country.  His  observations  had  convinced  him  that  the  Sec- 
ond Empire  had  fallen  largely  in  consequence  of  the  strike 
movement  during  1868-70,  and  he  was  anxious  to  preserve 
the  Republic  from  similar  troubles.  As  he  expressed  it. 
strikes  were  "  a  crime  of  lesc-dcmocratie  "  ~  which  it  was 
necessary  to  prevent  by  all  means. 

1  Barberet  was  afterwards  appointed  chief  of  the  Bureau  of  Trade 
Unions,  which  was  constituted  as  part  of  the  Dept.  of  the  Interior. 

~J.  Barberet,  Monographies  Professionelles  (Paris,  1886),  vol.  i, 
p.  16. 

275]  45 


46  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [276 

Barberet  outlined  the  following  program  for  the  syndi- 
cats.  They  were  to  watch  over  the  loyal  fulfilment  of  con- 
tracts of  apprenticeship;  to  organize  employment  bureaus; 
to  create  boards  of  conciliation  composed  of  an  equal  num- 
ber of  delegates  from  employers  and  from  workingmen 
for  the  peaceful  solution  of  trade  disputes;  to  found 
libraries  and  courses  in  technical  education;  to  utilize  their 
funds  not  to  "  foment  strikes  ",  but  to  buy  raw  materials 
and  instruments  of  labor;  and  finally,  "to  crown  these 
various  preparatory  steps  "  by  the  creation  of  co-opera- 
tive workshops  "  which  alone  would  give  groups  of  work- 
ingmen the  normal  access  to  industry  and  to  commerce  " 
and  which  would  in  time  equalize  wealth.1 

Under  Barberet's  influence  and  with  his  assistance  syn- 
dicats  were  reconstituted  in  a  few  trades  in  Paris  during 
1872.  These  syndicats  felt  the  necessity  of  uniting  into  a 
larger  body,  and  in  August  of  the  same  year  they  founded 
the  Cercle  de  I' Union  Ouvriere,  which  was  to  form  a  coun- 
ter-balance to  the  employers'  organization  L' Union  Nation- 
ale  du  Commerce  et  de  I'lndustrie.  The  Cercle  insisted  on 
its  peaceful  intentions ;  it  declared  that  its  aim  was  "  to- 
talize concord  and  justice  through  study  "  and  to  con- 
vince public  opinion  "  of  the  moderation  with  which  the 
workingmen  claim  their  rights."  2  The  Cercle  was  never- 
theless dissolved  by  the  government. 

The  syndicats,  however,  were  left  alone.  They  slowly 
increased  in  numbers  and  spread  to  new  trades.  There 
were  about  135  in  Paris  in  1875.  Following  the  example 
of  the  syndicats  of  the  Second  Empire,  they  organized  dele- 
gations of  workingmen  to  the  Exhibitions  of  Vienna  in 
.  1873  and  of  Philadelphia  in  1876.  But  their  supreme 

1  Barberet,  op.  cit.,  pp.  20-25. 

2  Fernand  Pelloutier,  Histoire  des  Bourses  du  Travail  (Paris,  1902), 
P-  35- 


277]         ORIGIN  OF  THE  FEDERATION  OF  LABOR  47 

effort  was  the  organization  of  the  first  French  Labor  Con- 
gress in  Paris  in  1876. 

The  Congress  was  attended  by  255  delegates  from  Paris 
and  105  from  the  provincial  towns.  The  delegates  repre- 
sented syndicats,  co-operative  societies  and  mutual  aid  so- 
cieties. The  program  of  the  Congress  included  eight  sub- 
jects: (i)  The  work  of  women;  (2)  syndical  chambers; 
(3)  councils  of  prud'hommes;  (4)  apprenticeship  and 
technical  education;  (5)  direct  representation  of  the  work- 
ing class  in  Parliament;  (6)  co-operative  associations  of 
production,  of  consumption  and  of  credit;  (7)  old-age 
pensions;  (8)  agricultural  associations  and  the  relations 
between  agricultural  and  industrial  workers. 

The  proceedings  of  the  Congress  were  calm  and  mod- 
erate. The  organizers  of  the  Congress  were  anxious  not 
to  arouse  the  apprehension  of  the  government  and  not  to 
compromise  the  republicans  with  whose  help  the  Congress 
was  organized.  The  reports  and  the  discussions  of  the  Con- 
gress showed  that  the  syndical  program  outlined  by  Bar- 
beret  was  accepted  by  almost  all  the  delegates.  They  in- 
sisted upon  the  necessity  of  solving  peaceably  all  industrial 
difficulties,  expressed  antipathy  for  the  strike  and  above  all 
affirmed  their  belief  in  the  emancipating  efficacy  of  co- 
operation. At  the  same  time  they  repudiated  socialism, 
which  one  of  the  delegates  proclaimed  "  a  bourgeois 
Utopia  "-1 

The  syndicats  held  a  second  congress  in  1876  in  Lyons. 
The  Congress  of  Lyons  considered  the  same  questions  as 
did  that  of  Paris,  and  gave  them  the  same  solutions.  In 
general,  the  character  of  the  second  congress  was  like  that 
of  the  first. 

The  third  Labor  Congress  held  in  Marseilles  in  1879^  was 

1  Seances  du  Congrcs  Ouvrier  de  France,  Session  de  1876,  p.  43. 


48  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [278 

a  new  departure  in  the  history  of  the  French  labor  move- 
ment. It  marked  the  end  of  the  influence  of  Barberet  and 
of  the  "  co-operators  "  and  the  beginning  of  socialist  influ- 
ence. The  Congress  of  Marseilles  accepted  the  title  of 
"  Socialist  Labor  Congress  ",  expressed  itself  in  favor  of 
the  collective  appropriation  of  the  means  of  production  and 
adopted  a  resolution  to  organize  a  workingmen's  social 
political  party. 

This  change  in  views  was  brought  about  by  a  concur- 
rence of  many  circumstances.  The  moderate  character  of 
the  syndicats  between  1872-1879  had  been  due  in  large 
measure  to  the  political  conditions  of  France.  The  cause  of 
the  Republic  was  in  danger  and  the  workingmen  were  cau- 
tious not  to  increase  its  difficulties.  But  after  the  elections 
of  1876  and  1877  and  upon  the  election  of  Grevy  to  the 
Presidency,  the  Republic  was  more  or  less  securely  estab- 
lished, and  the  workingmen  thought  that  they  should  now 
be  more  outspoken  in  their  economic  demands.  The  Com- 
mittee which  had  organized  the  Congress  of  Paris  had 
formulated  these  sentiments  in  the  following  terms :  "From 
the  moment  that  the  republican  form  of  government  was 
secured  ",  wrote  the  Committee,  "  it  was  indispensable  for 
the  working  class,  who  up  to  that  time  had  gone  hand  in 
hand  with  the  republican  bourgeoisie,  to  affirm  their  own 
interests  and  to  seek  the  means  which  would  permit  them 
to  transform  their  economic  condition."  x  It  was  believed 
that  the  means  to  accomplish  this  task  was  co-operation. 
The  belief  in  co-operation  was  so  intense  and  general  at 
that  time  that  one  of  the  delegates  to  the  Congress  of  Paris, 
M.  Finance,2  himself  an  opponent  of  co-operation,  pre- 
dicted a  large  co-operative  movement  similar  to  the  move- 

1  Seances  du  Congrcs  Ouvrier,  1876  (Paris,  1877),  p.  9. 

2  Afterward  one  of  the  active  members  of  the  Office  du  Travail. 


279]         ORIGIN  OF  THE  FEDERATION  OF  LABOR  49 

ments  of  1848-50  and  1864-67.  The  prediction  did  not 
come  true.  Nothing  important  was  accomplished  in  this 
field,  and  the  hopes  in  co-operation  receded  before  the  im- 
possibility of  putting  the  idea  into  practice.  The  critics 
and  opponents  of  co-operation  did  the  rest  to  discredit  the 
idea.  But  when  the  idea  of  co-operation  lost  its  influence 
over  the  syndicats,  the  ground  was  cleared  for  socialism. 
The  Congress  of  Lyons  had  declared  that  "  the  syndicats 
must  not  forget  that  the  wage-system  is  but  a  transitory 
stage  from  serfdom  to  an  unnamed  state."  1  When  the 
hope  that  this  unnamed  state  would  be  brought  about  by 
co-operation  was  gone,  the  "  unnamed  "  state  obtained  a 
name,  for  the  Socialists  alone  held  out  to  the  workingmen 
the  promise  of  a  new  state  which  would  take  the  place  of 
the  wage  system. 

On  ground  thus  prepared  the  Socialists  came  to  sow  their 
seed.  A  group  of  collectivists,  inspired  by  the  ideas  of  the 
"  International  ",  had  existed  in  Paris  since  1873. 2  But 
this  group  began  to  attract  attention  only  in  1877  when  it 
found  a  leader  in  Jules  Guesde.  Jules  Guesde  is  a  remark- 
able figure  in  the  history  of  French  Socialism  and  has  played 
a  great  part  in  shaping  the  movement.  He  had  edited  a 
paper,  Les  Droits  de  I'Homme,  in  Montpelier  in  1870-1  and 
had  expressed  his  sympathy  for  the  Commune.  This  cost 
him  a  sentence  of  five  years  in  prison.  He  preferred  exile, 
went  to  Switzerland,  there  came  into  contact  with  the  "  In- 
ternational "  and  was  influenced  by  Marxian  ideas. 

On  his  return  to  France,  Jules  Guesde  became  the  spokes- 
man and  propagandist  of  Marxian  or  "  scientific  social- 
ism ".  Fanatical,  vigorous,  domineering,  he  soon  made 
himself  the  leader  of  the  French  collectivists.  Towards 

1  Assoc.  Profess.,  vol.  i,  p.  243. 

2  Terrail-Mermeix,  La  France  Socialiste  (Paris,  1886),  p.  51. 


5o  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [2go 

the  end  of  1877,  he  founded  a  weekly,  L'fLgdite,  the  first 
number  of  which  outlined  the  program  which  the  paper  in- 
tended to  defend.  "  We  believe,"  wrote  L'Egalite,  "  with 
the  collectivist  school  to  which  almost  all  serious  minds  of 
the  working-class  of  both  hemispheres  now  belong,  that  the 
natural  and  scientific  evolution  of  mankind  leads  it  irre- 
sistibly to  the  collective  appropriation  of  the  soil  and  of 
the  instruments  of  labor."  In  order  to  achieve  this  end, 
L'Egalite  declared  it  necessary  for  the  proletariat  to  con- 
stitute itself  a  distinct  political  party  which  should  pursue 
the  aim  of  conquering  the  political  power  of  the  State.1 

The  collectivists  found  a  few  adherents  among  the 
workingmen  who  actively  propagated  the  new  ideas.  In 
1878,  several  syndicats  of  Paris:  those  of  the  machinists, 
joiners,  tailors,  leather  dressers  and  others,  accepted  the 
collectivist  program. 

The  collectivist  ideas  were  given  wider  publicity  and 
influence  by  the  persecution  of  the  government.  In  1878, 
an  international  congress  of  workingmen  was  to  be  held 
in  Paris  during  the  International  Exhibition.  The  Con- 
gress of  Lyons  (1878)  had  appointed  a  special  committee 
to  organize  this  international  congress.  Arrangements 
were  being  made  for  the  congress,  when  the  government 
prohibited  it. 

The  more  moderate  elements  of  the  Committee  gave  way 
before  the  prohibition  of  the  government,  but  Guesde  and 
his  followers  accepted  the  challenge  of  the  government  and 
continued  the  preparations  for  the  Congress.  The  govern- 
ment dispersed  the  Congress  at  its  very  first  session  and 
instituted  legal  proceedings  against  Guesde  and  other  dele- 
gates. 

The  trial  made  a  sensation  and  widely  circulated  the 

1  L'Sgalitt,  18  Nov.,  1877. 


28 1  ]         ORIGIN  OF  THE  FEDERATION  OF  LABOR  -51 

ideas  which  Guesde  defended  before  the  tribunal.  From  the 
prison  where  they  were  incarcerated  the  collectivists 
launched  an  appeal  "  to  the  proletarians,  peasant  proprie- 
tors and  small  masters  "  which  contained  an  exposition  of 
collectivist  principles  and  proposed  the  formation  of  a  dis- 
tinct political  party.  The  appeal  gained  many  adherents 
from  various  parts  of  France.1 

The  idea  of  having  workingmen's  representatives  in 
Parliament  had  already  come  up  at  the  Congress  of  Paris 
(1876).  This  Congress,  as  indicated  above,  had  on  its 
program  the  question  of  the  "  Representation  of  the  Pro- 
letariat in  Parliament."  The  reports  on  this  question  read 
at  the  Congress  were  extremely  interesting.  The  "  moder- 
ate co-operators  "  and  "  Barberetists  ",  as  they  were  nick- 
named by  the  revolutionary  collectivists,  insisted  in  these 
reports  upon  the  separation  which  existed  between  bour- 
gois  and  workingmen,  upon  the  inability  of  the  former  to 
understand  the  interests  and  the  aspirations  of  the  latter, 
and  upon  the  consequent  necessity  of  having  workingmen's 
representatives  in  Parliament.  These  reports  revealed  the 
deep-seated  sentiments  of  the  workingmen  which  made  it 
possible  for  tt^e  ideas  of  class  and  class  struggle  to  spread 
among  them. 

The  Congress  of  Lyons  (1878)  had  advanced  the  ques- 
tion a  step  further.  It  had  adopted  a  resolution  that  jour- 
nals should  be  created  which  should  support  workingmen- 
candidates  only. 

With  all  this  ground  prepared,  the  triumph  of  the  Social- 
ists at  the  Congress  of  Marseilles  (1879)  was  not  so  sudden 
as  some  have  thought  it  to  be.  The  influences  which  had 
brought  about  this  change  in  sentiment  were  clearly  out- 
lined by  the  Committee  on  Organization,  as  may  be  seen 
from  the  following  extract : 

1  Terrail-Mermeix,  op.  cit.,  p.  98. 


52  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [282 

From  the  contact  of  workingmen-delegates  from  all  civil- 
ized nations  that  had  appointed  a  rendezvous  at  the  Inter- 
national Exhibition,  a  clearly  revolutionary  idea  disentangled 
•itself.  .  .  .  When  the  International  Congress  was  brutally  dis- 
persed by  the  government,  one  thing  was  proven:  the  work- 
ing class  had  no  longer  to  expect  its  salvation  from  anybody 
but  itself.  .  .  .  The  suspicions  of  the  government  with  regard 
to  the  organizers  of  the  Congress,  the  iniquitous  proceedings 
which  it  instituted  against  them,  have  led  to  the  revolutionary 
resolutions  of  the  Congress  which  show  that  the  French  pro- 
letariat is  self-conscious  and  is  worthy  of  emancipation.1 

To  a  similar  conclusion  had  come  the  Committee  on 
Resolutions  appointed  by  the  Congress  of  Lyons.  In  the 
intervals  between  the  two  Congresses,  it  had  a  conference 
with  the  deputies  of  the  Department  of  Rhone  and  could 
report  only  failure.  The  deputies,  one  of  whom  belonged 
to  the  Extreme  Left,  were  against  the  limitation  of  hours 
of  work  in  the  name  of  liberty,  and  against  the  liberty  of 
association  in  the  name  of  the  superior  rights  of  the  State. 
"  The  remedy  to  this  state  of  affairs,"  concluded  the  Com- 
mittee, "  is  to  create  in  France  a  working-men's  party  such 
as  exists  already  in  several  neighboring  states."  x 

The  Congress  of  Marseilles  carried  out  the  task  which  the 
collectivists  assigned  to  it.  A  resolution  was  adopted  declar- 
ing that  the  co-operative  societies  could  by  no  means  be  con- 
sidered a  sufficiently  powerful  means  for  accomplishing  the 
emancipation  of  the  proletariat.  Another  declared  the  aim 
of  the  Congress  to  be :  "  The  collectivity  of  soil  and  of  sub- 
soil, of  instruments  of  labor,  of  raw  materials — to  be  given 
to  all  and  to  be  rendered  inalienable  by  society  to  whom 

1  Leon  Blum,  Les  Congres  Ouvriers  et  Socialistes  Frangais  (Paris, 
1901),  pp.  33-4. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  36. 


283]         ORIGIN  OF  THE  FEDERATION  OF  LABOR  53 

they  must  be  returned."  1  This  resolution  was  adopted  by 
73  votes  against  23. 

The  Congress  also  constituted  itself  a  distinct  party 
under  the  name  of  the  "  Federation  of  Socialist  Working- 
men  of  France  ".  The  party  was  organized  on  a  federalist 
principle.  I7 ranee  was  divided  into  six  regions  :  ( I )  Center 
or  Paris;  (2)  East  or  Lyons;  (3)  Marseilles  or  South;  (4) 
Bordeaux  or  West ;  (5)  North  or  Lille;  (6)  Algeria.  Each 
region  was  to  have  its  regional  committee  and  regional  con- 
gress and  be  autonomous  in  its  administration.  A  general 
committee  was  to  be  appointed  by  the  Congress  of  the  Fed- 
eration, to  be  held  annually  in  each  of  the  principal  regional 
towns  in  turn. 

After  the  Congress  of  Marseilles  (1879)  the  leadership 
of  the  syndical  movement  passed  to  the  Socialists.  This 
led  to  a  split  at  the  next  Congress  held  in  Havre  in  1880. 
The  "  moderates  "  and  "  co-operators  "  separated  from  the 
revolutionary  collectivists.  The  former  grouped  themselves 
about  L 'Union  des  Chambres  Syndicates  Ouvricres  de 
France.  They  held  two  separate  congresses  of  their  own  in 
1 88 1  and  1882,  which  attracted  little  attention  and  were  of 
no  importance.  The  Union  des  Chambres  Syndicates  con- 
fined itself  to  obtaining  a  reform  of  the  law  on  syndicats. 

The  Collectivists  themselves,  however,  were  not  long 
united.  The  movement  was  soon  disrupted  by  internal 
divisions  and  factions.  At  the  Congress  of  Marseilles 
(1879)  the  triumph  of  collectivism  was  assured  by  ele- 
ments which  had  the  principles  of  collectivism  in  common, 
but  which  differed  in  other  points.  In  Havre  (1880)  these 
elements  were  still  united  against  the  "moderate"  elements. 
But  after  the  Congress  of  Havre  they  separated  more  and 
more  into  distinct  and  warring  groups. 

1  Leon  de  Scilhac,  Lcs  Congrcs  Ouzricrs  en  France  (Paris,  1899), 
p.  47. 


54  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [284 

The  first  differentiation  took  place  between  the  parlia- 
mentary socialists  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  communist- 
anarchists  on  the  other.  Both  divisions  had  a  common  aim ; 
the  collective  appropriation  of  the  means  of  production. 
They  did  not  differ  much  in  their  ideas  on  distribution; 
there  were  communists  among  the  parliamentary  socialists. 
What  separated  them  most  was  difference  in  method.  The 
anarchists  rejected  the  idea  that  the  State,  which  in  their 
view  was  and  always  had  been  an  instrument  of  exploita- 
tion, could  ever  become  an  instrument  of  emancipation, 
even  in  the  hands  of  a  socialist  government.  The  first  act 
in  the  Social  Revolution,  in  their  opinion,  had  to  be  the  de- 
struction of  the  State.  With  this  aim  in  view,  the  anar- 
chists wished  to  have  nothing  to  do  with  parliamentary 
politics.  They  denounced  parliamentary  action  as  a  "  pell- 
mell  of  compromise,  of  corruption,  of  charlatanism  and  of 
absurdities,  which  does  no  constructive  work,  while  it  de- 
stroys character  and  kills  the  revolutionary  spirit  by  hold- 
ing the  masses  under  a  fatal  illusion."  x  The  anarchists 
saw  only  one  way  of  bringing  about  the  emancipation  of 
the  working-class;  namely,  to  carry  on  an  active  propa- 
ganda and  agitation,  to  organize  groups,  and  at  an  oppor- 
tune moment  to  raise  the  people  in  revolt  against  the  State 
and  the  propertied  classes;  then  destroy  the  State,  expro- 
priate the  capitalist  class  and  reorganize  society  on  com- 
munist and  federalist  principles.  This  was  the  Social 
Revolution  they  preached.2 

From  1883  onward  the  anarchist  propaganda  met  with 
success  in  various  parts  of  France,  particularly  in  Paris 

1  Pourquoi  Guesde  n'est-il  pas  anarchists?  p.  6. 

2  On  the  anarchist  theory,  the  works  of  Bakounin,  Kropotkin,  Reclus 
and  J.  Grave  should  be  consulted ;  on  anarchism  in  France  see  Du- 
bois,  Le  Peril  anarchiste;  Garin,  /' 'Anarchic;  also  various  periodicals, 
particularly,  Le  Rcvolte  and  Les  Temps  Nouveaux. 


285]         ORIGIN  OF  THE  FEDERATION  OF  LABOR  55 

and  in  the  South.  There  were  thousands  of  workingmen 
who  professed  the  anarchist  ideas,  and  the  success  of  the 
anarchists  was  quite  disquieting  to  the  socialists.1 

I  The  socialists,  on  the  contrary,  called  upon  the  working- 
men  to  participate  in  the  parliamentary  life  of  the  coun- 
try. Political  abstention,  they  asserted,  is  neither  helpful 
nor  possible.2  The  workingman  believes  in  using  his  right 
to  vote,  and  to  ignore  his  attitude  of  mind  is  of  no  avail. 
Besides,  to  bring  about  the  transformation  of  capitalist 
society  into  a  collectivist  society,  the  political  machinery 
of  the  State  must  be  used.  There  is  no  other  way  of  ac- 
complishing this  task.  The  State  will  disappear  after  the 
socialist  society  has  been  firmly  established.  But  there  is 
an  inevitable  transitory  period  when  the  main  economic 
reforms  must  be  carried  out  and  during  which  the  political 
power  of  the  State  must  be  in  the  hands  of  the  socialist 
party  representing  the  working-class.  The  first  act  of  the 
Social  Revolution,  therefore,  is  to  conquer  the  political 
power  of  the  State.3 

Within  the  socialist  ranks  themselves  further  divisions 
soon  took  place.  In  1882,  at  the  Congress  of  St.  Etienne, 
the  party  was  split  into  two  parts ;  one  part  followed 
Guesde,  the  other  followed  Paul  Brousse.  The  latter  part 
took  the  name  of  Parti  ouvrier  socialiste  revolutionnaire 
frangais — it  dropped  the  word  "  revolutionnaire  "  from 
its  title  in  1883 — and  continued  to  bear  as  sub-title,  the  name 
"Federation  of  socialist  workingmen  of  France."  Guesde's 
party  took  the  name  of  Parti  Ouvrier  Franqais. 

The  Parti  Ouvrier  Frangais  claimed  to  represent  the 
"  revolutionary  "  and  "  scientific  "  socialism  of  Marx.  It 

1  John  Labusquiere,  La  Troisieme  Republique  (Paris),  p.  257. 

2  L'£galite,  30  June,  1880. 

3  In  socialist  writings  this  transition  period  is  always  spoken  of  as 
the  "  Dictatorship  of  the  Proletariat." 


56  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [286 

accepted  the  familiar  doctrines  of  "  orthodox  "  Marxism, 
which  it  popularized  in  France.  It  affirmed  its  revolution- 
ary character  by  denying  the  possibility  of  reforms  in  cap- 
italist society  and  by  insisting  upon  the  necessity  of  seizing 
the  political  power  of  the  State  in  a  revolutionary  way. 
In  1886  J.  Guesde  wrote  as  follows: 

In  the  capitalist  regime,  that  is,  as  long  as  the  means  of  pro- 
duction and  of  existence  are  the  exclusive  property  of  a  few 
who  work  less  and  less,  all  rights  which  the  constitutions  and 
the  codes  may  grant  to  others,  to  those  who  concentrate  within 
themselves  more  and  more  all  muscular  and  cerebral  work,  will 
remain  always  and  inevitably  a  dead  letter.  In  multiplying 
reforms,  one  only  multiplies  shams  (trompe-l'oeil).1 

Inability  to  carry  out  real  reforms  was  ascribed  to  both 
national  legislative  bodies  and  to  the  municipalities.  There- 
fore, 

if  the  party  has  entered  into  elections,  it  is  not  for  the  pur- 
pose of  carving  out  seats  of  councillors  or  deputies,  which  it 
leaves  to  the  hemorroids  of  bourgeois  of  every  stamp,  but 
because  the  electoral  period  brings  under  our  educational  in- 
fluence that  part  of  the  masses  which  in  ordinary  times  is 
most  indifferent  to  our  meetings.2 

The  municipalities  conquered  were  to  become  just  so 
many  centres  of  recruiting  and  of  struggle.  The  Parti 
Ouvrier  was  to  be  a  "  kind  of  recruiting  and  instructing 
sergeant  preparing  the  masses  for  the  final  assault  upon 
the  State  which  is  the  citadel  of  capitalist  society."  For 
only  a  revolution  would  permit  the  productive  class  to  seize 

1  Jules  Guesde,  Le  Socialisme  au  jour  le  jour  (Paris,  1899),  p.  268. 

2  Jules  Guesde  and  Paul  Laf argue,  Le  Programme  du  Parti  Ouvrier, 
4th  edition  (Paris,  1897),  p.  32. 

3  Le  Programme  du  Parti  Ouvrier,  p.  52. 


287] 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  FEDERATION  OF  LABOR 


the  political  power  and  to  use  it  for  the  economic  expro- 
priation of  capitalistic  France  and  for  the  nationalization 
or  socialization  of  the  productive  forces.  Of  course  no 
man  and  no  party  can  call  forth  a  revolution,  but  when 
the  revolution  which  the  nineteenth  century  carried  within 
itself  arose  as  a  result  of  national  and  international  com- 
plications, the  Parti  Oimricr  would  be  the  party  to  assume 
the  role  of  directing  it.1 

The  Parti  Ouvrier  adopted  a  centralized  form  of  organi- 
zation. It  became  in  time  the  strongest  and  best  organized 
socialist  party  of  France.  It  was  particularly  strong  in 
the  Department  du  Nord  and  among  the  textile  workers. 
It  was  also  known  as  the  "  Guesdist  "  party,  after  its  leader 
Guesde. 

The  Parti  Ouvrier  denounced  the  members  of  the  Parti 
Ouvrier  rcvohitionnaire  socialistc,  or  "  Broussists,"  also 
thus  named  after  their  leader  Brousse,  as  "opportunists  and 
possibilists  "  because  they  believed  in  the  possibility  of  re- 
forms and  had  said  that  it  was  necessary  "  to  split  up  our 
program  until  we  make  it  finally  possible."  The  nick- 
name, possibilists,  has  remained  as  another  designation  of 
the  Broussists. 

The  Bro assists  cared  little  for  the  theories  of  Marx. 
They  were  disposed  to  allow  larger  differences  of  doctrine 
within  their  ranks  and  more  local  autonomy  in  their  or- 
ganization. They  ascribed  much  importance  to  municipal 
politics.  They  conceived  the  conquest  of  political  power  as 
a  more  peaceful  process  of  a  gradual  infiltration  into  the 
municipal,  departmental  and  national  legislative  bodies. 
But  like  the  "  Guesdists,"  they  were  collectivists  and  took 
the  class  struggle  as  their  point  of  departure. 

1  Le  Programme  du  Parti  Ouvrier,  p.  30. 

2  L.  Blum,  op.  cit.,  p.  75. 


58  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [288 

From  the  very  outset,  the  Broussists  concentrated  their 
efforts  upon  gaining  an  entrance  into  Parliament  and  into 
the  municipalities.  They  had  a  numerous  following  in 
Paris  among  the  working  population,  and  among  the  lower 
strata  of  the  middle  class. 

The  split  between  Guesdists  and  Broussists  was  followed 
by  another  in  the  ranks  of  the  latter.  In  1887  the  Brouss- 
ists succeeded  in  electing  seven  of  their  members  to  the 
municipal  council  of  Paris.  This  led  to  internal  difficulties. 
A  ^number  of  party  members  were  discontented  with  thcrtrr- 
ganization  which  they  claimed  was  entirely  "  bossed  "-by 
its  leaders.  They  grouped  themselves  in  their  turn  about 
J.  Allemane  and  became  known  as  "  Allemanists."  The 
Allemanists  accused  the  Broussists  of  being  too  much  ab- 
sorbed in  politics  and  of  neglecting  the  propaganda  and 
organization  of  the  party.  In  1890  they  separated  from 
the  Broussists  and  constituted  a  socialist  party  of  their  own. 
The  Allemanists  absorbed  the  more  revolutionary  elements 
of  the  party  and  were  the  leading  spirits  in  some  of  the 
largest  and  strongest  syndicats. 

Two  more  socialist  groups  must  be  mentioned  in  order 
that  the  reader  may  have  a  complete  view  of  the  socialist 
world  in  which  the  syndicats  .of  France  were  moving  dur- 
ing this  period*  These  two  were  the  Blanquists  and  theln= 
dependent  Socialists. 

The  Blanquists — known  also  as  the  Comite  Revolution- 
naire  Central — were  held  together  by  a  bond  of  common 
tradition,  namely,  by  their  loyalty  to  the  name  of  Blanqui, 
spoken  of  in  the  preceding  chapter.  The  leaders  of  the 
Blanquists  were  .men  who  had  taken  a  more  or  less  promi- 
nent part  in  the  Commune  and  who  had  returned  to  France 
after  amnesty  was  granted  in  1880.  They  considered  them- 
selves the  heirs  of  Blanqui  and  the  continuators  of— his 
ideas;  but  under  the  political  conditions  of  the  Third  Re- 


089]         ORIGIN  OF  THE  FEDERATION  OF  LABOR  59 

public  they_brushed  aside  the  secret  practices  of  former 
times  and  entered  into  politics  as  a  distinct  party  with  a 
communist  program.  Their  aim  was  also  the  conquest  of 
political  power  for  the  purpose  of  realizing  a  communistic 
society  and  "they  approved  of  all  means  that  would  bring 
about  the  realization  of  this  end. 

The  group  of  Independent  Socialists  grew  out  of  the 
"  Society  for  Social  Economy  "  founded  in  1885  by  Malon, 
once  Srmember  of  the  "  International  ".  The  "  Society  for 
Social  Economy  "  was  organized  for  the  purpose  of  elab- 
orating legislative  projects  of  a  general  socialist  character 
which  were  published  in  the  monthly  of  the  Society,  La 
Revue  Socialiste.1  But  the  Society  soon  gained  adherents 
among  advanced  Republicans  and  Radicals  and  entered  into 
poTfEics! IF  advocated  the  gradual  nationalization  of  public 
services,  laws  for  the  protection  of  labor,  self-government 
for  the  communes,  etc.  The  party  became  an  important 
factor  in  the  political  life  of  France.  Some  of  the  best 
known  socialists  of  France  have  come  from  its  ranks,  as  J. 
Jaures,  Millerand,  Viviani  and  others. 

Amid  these  socialist  factions,  the  syndicate  were  a  cov- 
eted bit  Torn  to  pieces  because  everybody  wanted  the  larger 
part  of  it.  At  their  Congress  of  Paris  (1883)  the  "Brouss- 
ists  "  adopted  a  resolution  that  "  the  members  of  the  Party 
will  be  bound  to  enter  their  syndical  chamber  or  respective 
trade  group  and  to  promote  the  creation  of  syndical  cham- 
bers and  of  trade  groups  where  none  exist  as  yet."  The 
Guesdists  in  their  turn  had  adopted  a  similar  reso- 
lution at  their  Congress  in  Roanne  in  1882,  and  at  their 
succeeding  Congress,  in  Roubaix  (1884),  they  adopted  a 

1  On  the  socialist  groups  of  this  period   see  Leon   de   Seilhac,  Le 
Monde  Socialiste  (Paris,  1896). 

2  Seilhac,  Les  Congress  Ourriers,  p.  124. 


60  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [290 

resolution  to  promote  "  as  soon  as  possible  the  formation 
of  national  federations  of  trades  which  should  rescue  the 
isolated  syndicats  from  their  fatal  weakness."  x  When  the 
Allemanists  separated  from  the  Broussists,  they,  in  their 
turn,  made  it  obligatory  for  members  of  their  party  to  be- 
Ipng  to  their  respective  syndicats. 

These  acts,  while  promoting  the  organization  of  the  syn- 
dicats, impressed  upon  the  latter  a  political  character.  The 
syndicats  were  utilized  for  electoral  purposes,  were  made  to 
serve  the  interests  of  the  socialist  group  to  which  they  ad- 
hered, and  were  drawn  into  the  whirlpool  of  political  dis- 
sensions and  rivalry.  The  effect  was  destructive  for  the 
syndicats.  The  acrimonious  and  personal  polemics  of  the 
socialist  leaders  bred  ill-feeling  among  their  workingmen 
followers ;  the  invective  and  abuse  filling  the  periodical  liter- 
ature of  the  socialist  groups  found  an  echo  in  the  assemblies 
of  the  workingmen;  the  mutual  hatreds  separating  politi- 
cally Allemanists  from  Guesdists,  Guesdists  from  anarchists 
were  carried  over  into  the  syndicats  which  were  hindered 
thereby  in  their  growth  or  entirely  driven  to  disintegration. 
The  adherence  of  a  syndicat  to  any  one  socialist  group 
generally  repelled  the  non-socialists  and  enraged  the  ad- 
herents of  other  socialist  groups,  and  often  led  to  the  or- 
ganization of  rival  syndicats  in  the  same  trade  and  locality. 
The  literature  of  the  French  labor  movement  is  full  of  in- 
stances of  the  disorganizing  effect  which  these  political  dis- 
sensions exerted  upon  the  syndicats. 

Economic  conditions,  however,  were  impelling  the  work- 
ingmen to  union.  Since  the  Commune,  the  industrial  de- 
velopment of  France  had  gone  on  without  interruption, 
concentrating  the  economic  powers  of  the  employing 
classes.  In  the  face  of  the  economic  organizations  of  the 

1  Blum,  op.  cit.,  p.  93. 


291]         ORIGIN  OF  THE  FEDERATION  OF  LABOR  6 1 

employers,  the  scattered  and  isolated  syndicats  were  of  little 
significance,  and  the  necessity  of  a  larger  combination  made 
itself  felt.  Besides,  in  1884,  a  new  law  on  syndicats  was 
passed.  This  law  authorized  the  formation  of  syndicats 
under  certain  conditions  of  which  article  4  was  obnoxious 
to  the  workingmen.  This  article  4  of  the  new  law  made 
it  obligatory  for  every  syndicat  to  send  in  the  names  and 
addresses  of  its  administrators  to  the  municipal  authori- 
ties. In  Paris  they  had  to  be  sent  to  the  Prefect  of  the 
Police.  The  workingmen  thought  that  this  condition  would 
subject  them  to  the  mercy  of  the  police  and  of  the  employ- 
ers, and  they  wanted  to  manifest  their  attitude  to  the  new 
law. 

Under  these  conditions  a  general  congress  of  syndicats 
was  called  in  Lyons  in  October,  1886.  Organized  work- 
ingmen of  various  political  opinions  met  here  and  at  once 
the  sentiments  and  needs  which  brought  them  together 
found  expression  in  the  report  of  the  Committee  on  Organi- 
zation from  which  the  following  lines  may  be  quoted : 

We  are  organized  workingmen  who  have  made  a  study  of 
social  problems  and  who  have  recognized  that  the  diversity 
of  doctrines  contributes  powerfully  to  divide  us  instead  of 
uniting  us. 

Slaves  of  the  same  master,  bearing  the  same  claims,  suffer- 
ing from  the  same  evils,  having  the  same  aspirations,  the 
same  needs  and  the  same  rights,  we  have  decided  to  set  aside 
our  political  and  other  preferences,  to  march  hand  in  hand, 
and  to  combine  our  forces  against  the  common  enemy.  The 
problems  of  labor  have  always  the  power  of  uniting  the  work- 
ingmen.1 

The  first  question  on  the  program  of  the  Congress  was 
the  "  prospect  of  a  Federation  of  all  workingmen's  syndi- 

1  Seances  du  Congrcs  Ouvrier,  session  de  1886,  pp.  18-19. 


62  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [292 

cats."  The  discussion  brought  out  the  fact  that  the  dele- 
gates had  different  ideas  on  the  future  role  of  the  Federa- 
tion. Still  the  majority  united  on  the  following  resolution : 

Considering  that  in  face  of  the  powerful  bourgeois  organiza- 
tion made  without  and  against  the  working-class,  it  not  only 
behooves,  but  it  is  the  duty  of  the  latter  to  create,  by  all  means 
possible,  groupings  and  organizations  of  workingmen  against 
those  of  the  bourgeois,  for  defense  first,  and  we  hope  for 
offensive  action  soon  afterwards; 

Considering  that  every  organization  of  workingmen  which 
is  not  imbued  with  the  distinction  of  classes,  by  the  very  fact 
of  the  economic  and  political  conditions  of  existing  society, 
and  which  exist  only  for  the  sake  of  giving  assent  to  the  will 
of  the  government  and  of  the  bourgeoisie,  or  of  presenting 
petty  observations  of  a  respectful  and  therefore  of  a  humiliat- 
ing nature  for  the  dignity  of  the  working-class,  cannot  be  con- 
sidered as  part  of  the  workingmen's  armies  marching  to  the 
conquest  of  their  rights ;  for  these  reasons, 

A  National  Federation  is  founded.  .  .  .x 

The  aim  of  the  Federation  was  to  help  individual  syndi- 
cats  in  their  struggles  with  employers. 

"  The  National  Federation  of  Syndicats,"  however,  did 
not  achieve  its  end.  It  soon  fell  into  the  hands  of  the 
Guesdists  who  utilized  the  organization  for  political  and 
electoral  purposes.  The  Congresses  of  the  "  National  Fed- 
eration of  Syndicats  "  were  held  in  the  same  place  and 
about  the  same  time  as  were  those  of  the  Parti  Ouvrier, 
were  composed  of  the  same  men  and  passed  the  same  reso- 
lutions. Besides,  the  "  National  Federation  of  Syndicats  " 
never  succeeded  in  establishing  connections  between  the 
local  syndicats  and  the  central  organization  (the  Counseil 

1  Congrcs  National  des  Syndicats  Ouvriers,  Compte  Rendu,  pp.  344-5- 


293]         ORIGIN  OF  THE  FEDERATION  OF  LABOR  63 

federal  national}  and  could,  therefore,  exert  little  economic 
influence. 

While  the  "  National  Federation  of  Syndicats  "  became 
a  war-engine  at  the  service  of  the  Guesdists,1  another  cen- 
traToTganization  was  created  by  the  rivals  of  the  Guesdists. 
This  was  the  "  Federation  of  Labor  Exchanges  of  France  " 
(Federation  des  Bourses  du  Travail  de  France}.  The  idea 
of  the  Bourse  du  Travail  may  be  traced  back  to  the  middle 
of  the  nineteenth  century  and  even  further  back  to  the 
Great  Revolution.2  At  first  the  idea  was  to  erect  a  building 
where  the  workingmen  in  need  of  work  and  the  employers 
in  need  of  workingmen  could  meet.  It  was  proposed  that 
the  prevailing  rate  of  wages  in  each  industry  be  published 
there  day  by  day  and  that  the  quotations  of  the  Bourse  du 
Travail  then  be  inserted  in  the  newspapers.  ...  It  was 
expected  that  the  workingmen  of  an  entire  country,  even  of 
an  entire  continent  would  be  enabled  in  this  manner  to 
know,  day  by  day,  the  places  where  work  might  be  ob- 
tained under  the  most  favorable  conditions,  and  where  they 
might  choose  to  go  to  demand  it.3'  But  after  the  law  of 
1884  which  legalized  the  syndicats,  the  Bourse  du  Travail 
was  conceived  in  a  larger  spirit,  as  a  center  where  all  the 
syndicats  of  a  locality  could  have  their  headquarters,  ar- 
range meetings,  give  out  information,  serve  as  bureaus  of 
employment,  organize  educational  courses,  have  their  lib- 
raries and  bring  the  workingmen  of  all  trades  into  contact 
with  one  another.  The  municipalities  were  to  promote 
their  creation  and  to  subsidize  them.4 

1  Pelloutier,  op.  cit.,  p.  60. 

2  Charles  Franck,  Les  Bourses  du  Travail  et  la  Confederation  Gen- 
erale  du  Travail  (Paris,  1910),  p.  17. 

8  G.  de  Molinari,  Les  Bourses  du  Travail  (Paris,  1893),  p.  257. 
4  Molinari,  0/>.  cit.,  p.  280. 


64  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [294 

The  first  Bourse  du  Travail  was  opened  in  Paris  in  1887. 
The  example  of  Paris  was  followed  by  other  municipalities 
of  France,  and  in  a  short  time  many  of  the  larger  cities 
of  France  had  their  Bourses  du  Travail  The  Allemanists 
obtained  the  predominating  influence  in  the  Bourses  du 
Travail,  and  they  conceived  the  idea  of  opposing  to  the 
"  National  Federation  of  Syndicats  " — which  was  an  in- 
strument in  the  hands  of  the  Guesdists — a  "  Federation  of 
Bourses  du  Travail"  in  which  they  would  have  the  leading 
part.  *  The  "  Federation  of  Bourses  du  Travail "  was  or- 
ganized in  1892  with  the  following  program:  (i)  To  unify 
the  demands  of  the  workingmen's  syndicats  and  to  bring 
about  the  realization  of  these  demands;  (2)  To  extend  and 
to  propagate  the  action  of  the  Bourses  du  Travail,  in 
the  industrial  and  agricultural  centers;  (3)  To  nominate 
delegates  to  the  National  Secretariat  of  Labor;  (4)  To  col- 
lect statistical  data  and  to  communicate  them  to  the  adher- 
ing Bourses,  and  at  the  same  time  to  generalize  the  gratui- 
tous service  of  finding  employment  for  workers  of  both 
sexes  and  of  all  trades.2 

The  "  National  Secretariat  of  Labor "  mentioned  was 
created  after  the  International  Socialist  Congress  of  Brus- 
sels in  1891.  The  Congress  of  Brussels  had  proposed  to 
create  in  all  countries  National  Secretariats  in  order  to 
unify  the  labor  and  socialist  movement  of  the  world.  In 
France,  the  National  Secretariat  of  Labor  soon  experienced 
the  fate  of  other  organizations.  In  view  of  political  dif- 
ferences, it  was  abandoned  by  the  Guesdists,  Independents, 
and  Broussists.  It  therefore  could  not  achieve  the  aim  it 
ha.d  in  view  and  lost  all  significance. 
i  Into  this  situation  there  now  entered  another  factor, 

1  Pelloutier,  op,  cit.,  p.  64. 

*  Seilhac,  Les  Congres  Ouvriers,  p.  230. 


295]         ORIGIN  OF  THE  FEDERATION  OF  LABOR  65' 

which  was  to  determine  the  course  of  further  groupings. 
This  factor  was  the  idea  of  the  general  strike.  The  idea 
was  not  new  in  the  history  of  the  labor  movement  and  not 
original  with  France.  It  had  been  widely  discussed  in  Eng- 
land during  the  30'$  1  and  afterwards  at  the  Congresses  of 
the  "  International  ".2  It  reappeared  in  France  in  the  sec- 
ond half  of  the  8o's  and  seems  to  have  been  suggested  by 
the  wide  strike  movement  in  America  during  1886-7.  Its 
first  propagandist  in  France  seems  to  have  been  a  French 
anarchist  workingman,  Tortelier,  a  member  of  the  syndicat 
of  carpenters.15 

The  idea  of  the  general  strike  was  hailed  enthusiastically 
by  the  French  syndicats.  On  the  one  hand  it  seemed  to 
give  the  workingmen  a  new  weapon  in  their  economic 
struggles.  It  was  seen  above  how  reluctant  French  work- 
ingmen had  been  to  use  the  strike  during  the  6o's  and  70'$. 
Though  forced  by  economic  conditions  to  use  it,  the  French 
workingmen  still  considered  it  a  necessary  evil  which  never 
fully  rewarded  the  sacrifices  it  involved.  The  general 
strike  seemed  to  repair  the  defects  of  the  partial  strike. 
It  seemed  to  insure  success  by  increasing  the  number  of 
strikers  and  by  extending  the  field  of  disturbance.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  general  strike  suggested  itself  as  a  method 
of  bringing  about  the  Social  Revolution.  This  question 
was  a  vital  one  with  the  socialist  syndicats.  It  was  much 
debated  and  discussed  and  divided  deeply  the  adherents  of 
the  various  socialist  and  anarchist  groups.  '  The  conquest 
of  political  power,"  the  method  advocated  by  Guesdists  and 
others,  seemed  vague  and  indefinitely  remote;  a  general  re- 

1  B.  &  S.  Webb,  History  of  Trade  Unionism,  pp.  118-122. 

-  Dr.  E.  Georgi,  Theorie  mid  Praxis  dcs  Generalstreiks  in  der  mod- 
ernen  Arbciter-bewegiing  (Jena,  1908). 

3  H.  Lagardelle,  La  Grcve  Generate  ct  le  Socialisme  (Paris,  1905), 
p.  42. 


THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [2q6 

volt,  such  as  advocated  by  the  anarchists,  seemed  impos- 
sible in  view  of  the  new  armaments  and  of  the  new  con- 
struction of  cities  which  made  barricades  and  street  fighting 
a  thing  of  the  past.  These  two  methods  eliminated,  the 
general  strike  seemed  to  present  the  only  and  proper  weapon 
\in  the  hands  of  the  workingmen  for  the  realization  of  their 
'•final  emancipation. 

In  this  sense,  the  principle  o.f  the  general  strike  was 
vctfed  for  the  first  time  iji  1888  at  the  Congress  of  the  "  Na- 
tional Federation  of  Syndicats  "  in  Bordeaux.  The  idea 
ispread  rapidly.  The  Allemanists  declared  in  favor  of  it 
at  their  Congresses  in  1891  and  1892. *  Fernand  Pelloutier, 
of  whom  more  will  be  said  in  the  next  chapter,  defended 
it  successfully  before  a  socialist  congress  in  Tours  in  1892. 
The  same  year,  Aristide  Briand  appeared  as  the  eloquent 
champion  of  the  general  strike  before  the  Congress  of  the 
"  National  Federation  of  Syndicats  "  in  Marseilles.2  The 
Blanquists  admitted  the  general  strike  as  one  of  the  pos- 
sible revolutionary  means.  QnljL  the  Guesdisjts,  45J££e 
against  the  general  strike  and  at  their  Congress  in  Lille..,.. 
(1890)  declared  it  impossible. 

fTThe  conception  of  the  general  strike  that  prevailed  dur- 
ing this  period  was  that  of  a  peaceful  cessation  of  work. 
The  strike,  it  was  agreed,  is  a  right  guaranteed  by  law. 
Even  if  a  strike  were  to  spread  to  many  industries  and  as- 
sume a  general  character,  the  workingmen  would  still  be 
exercising  their  rights  and  could  not  be  lawfully  prosecuted. 
!  The  general  strike,  therefore,  would  enable  the  working- 
1  men  to  carry  out  a  Revolution  by  legal  means  and  would 
make  the  revolution  an  easy  matter.     The  general  strike 
must  mean  revolution  because  a  complete  cessation  of  work 

1  L.  Blum,  op.  cit.,  pp.  129,  137. 

2  Le  Congrcs  National  des  Syndicats,  Compte  Rendu,  pp.  45  et  seq. 


297]         ORIGIN  OF  THE  FEDERATION  OF  LABOR  67 

would  paralyze  the  life  of  the  country  and  would  reduce 
the  ruling  classes  to  famine.  Lasting  a  few  days  only,  it 
would  compel  the  government  to  capitulate  before  the  work- 
ingmen,  and  would  carry  the  workingmen's  party  into 
power.  Thus,  a  "  peaceful  strike  of  folded  arms  "  (grcvc 
des  bras  croiscs)  would  usher  in  the  Social  Revolution 
which  would  bring  about  the  transformation  of  society. 
The  feeling  prevailed  that  the  general  strike  could  begin 
any  moment  and  that  it  assured  the  speedy  realization  of 
the  socialist  ideal.  At  first  it  was  thought  that  the  general 
strike  could  be  organized  or  decreed,  but  this  idea  was  soon 
given  up,  and  the  general  strike  came  to  be  thought  of  as 
a  spontaneous  movement  which  might  be  hastened  only  by 
propaganda  and  organization. 

The  conception  of  the  general  strike  involved  one  more 
important  point.  It  implied  the  superior  value  of  the  eco- 
nomic method  of  organization  and  struggle  over  the  politi- 
cal. The  general  strike  is  a  phenomenon  of  economic  life 
and  must  be  Jbased  on  an  economic  organization  of  the 
working-class. 

On  this  conception  of  the  general  strike  the  Guesdists 
threw  themselves  with  all  the  subtlety  of  their  dialectics. 
They  asserted  that  the  idyllic  picture  of  the  social  revolu- 
tion was  too  puerile  to  be  taken  seriously ;  that  before  the 
capitalists  felt  the  pangs  of  hunger,  the  workingmen  would 
already  have  starved.1  They  insisted  that  no  such  peaceful 
general  strike  was  possible;  that  either  the  workingmen 
would  lose  their  composure,  or  the  government  wrould  pro- 
voke a  collision.  On  the  other  hand,  they  affirmed  that  a 
successful  general  strike  presupposes  a  degree  of  organiza- 

1  To  meet  this  criticism  the  Allemanists  argued  that  the  militant 
workingmen  could  have  "reserves"  accumulated  little  by  little  which 
would  allow  them  to  await  for  some  time  the  results  of  the  general 
strike. 


68  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [298 

tion  and  solidarity  among  workingmen  which,  if  realized, 
would  make  the  general  strike  itself  unnecessary.  But, 
above  all,  they  argued  that  the  general  strike  could  be 
.  successful,  because  in  the  economic  field  the  workingmen 
are  weaker  than  the  capitalists  and  cannot  hope  to  win; 
that  only  in  the  political  field  are  the  workingmen  equal, 
and  even  superior  to  the  employers,  because  they  are  the 
greater  number.  The  conclusion,  therefore,  was  that  "  the 
general  strike  is  general  nonsense  "  and  that  the  only  hope 
of  the  workingmen  lay  in  the  conquest  of  political  power. 
The  syndicat  could  only  have  a  secondary  and  limited  im- 
portance in  the  struggle  for  emancipation.1 

The  attitude  of  the  Guesdists  towards  the  general 
strike  brought  them  into  conflict  with  the  "  National  Fed- 
eration of  Syndicats  "  which  voted  in  favor  of  the  general 
strike  at  Marseilles  in  1892.  The  conflict  at  first  was 
latent,  but  soon  led  to  a  split  in  the  "  National  Federation 
of  Syndicats  "  and  to  a  readjustment  of  the  various  ele- 
ments of  the  syndicats.  This  took  place  in  the  following 
way. 

In  1893  the  Bourse  dn  Travail  of  Paris  was  authorized 
by  the  Second  Congress  of  the  "  Federation  of  Bourses  " 
to  call  a  general  trade-union  Congress  in  which  all  syndi- 
cats should  take  part.  The  Congress  was  to  convene  the 
i8th  of  July,  1893.  About  ten  days  before  this,  the  gov- 
ernment closed  the  Bourse  du  Travail  of  Paris.  The  rea- 
son given  was  that  the  syndicats  adhering  to  the  Bourse 
had  not  conformed  to  the  law  of  1884.  This  act  of  the 
government  provoked  an  agitation  among  the  workingmen, 
the  Congress  took  on  a  character  of  protest,  and  a  large 
number  of  syndicats  wished  to  be  represented. 

The  Congress  of  Paris  adopted  the  principle  of  the  gen- 

1  G.  Deville,  Principes  Socialities  (Paris,  1896),  pp.  191-201. 


299]         ORIGIN  OF  THE  FEDERATION  OF  LABOR  £9 

eral  strike  by  vote,  but  in  view  of  governmental  persecu- 
tion, the  necessity  of  unifying  the  forces  of  the  working- 
men  was  thought  to  be  the  most  important  question.  It 
was  discussed  at  length,  and  the  Congress  adopted  a  reso- 
lution, that  all  existing  syndicats,  within  the  shortest 
possible  time,  should  join  the  Federation  of  their  trade  or 
constitute  such  a  federation  if  none  as  yet  existed;  that 
they  should  form  themselves  into  local  federations  or 
Bourses  dn  Travail  and  that  these  Federations'  and 
Bourses  dn  Travail  should  form  a  "  National  Federation," 
and  the  Congress  invited  the  "  Federation  of  Bourses  du 
Travail  "  and  the  "  National  Federation  of  Syndicats  "  to 
merge  into  one  organization. 

The  Congress  of  Paris  also  called  a  general  Congress  of 
syndicats  for  the  following  year  in  Nantes  and  commis- 
sioned the  Bourse  du  Travail  of  Nantes  to  arrange  the 
Congress.  The  "  Bourse  "  of  Nantes  had  already  received 
a  mandate  from  the  "  National  Federation  of  Syndicats  " 
to  arrange  its  Congress.  It  therefore  decided  to  arrange 
both  Congresses  at  the  same  time  and  to  make  one  Con- 
gress out  of  two.  The  National  Council  of  the  "  Federa- 
tion of  Syndicats ",  where  the  Guesdists  presided,  pro- 
tested, but  with  no  result.  A  general  Congress  of  syndi- 
cats was  held  in  Nantes  in  1894. 

By  this  time  the  number  of  syndicats  in  France  had  con- 
siderably increased.  According  to  the  Annuaire  Statis- 
tiquc,  the  growth  of  the  syndicats  since  1884  was  as  fol- 
lows : 


70  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [300 

Year  Number  of  syndicats       Membership 

1884  68 

1885  221 

1886  280 

1887  501 

1888  725 

1889  821 

1890  1,006  139,692 

1891  1,250  205,152 

1892  1,589  288,770 

1893  1,926  402,125 

1894  2,178  403,440 

Of  these,  1,662  syndicats  were  represented  at  the  Con- 
gress of  Nantes.  This  fact  shows  how  keen  was  the  in- 
terest felt  in  the  idea  of  the  general  strike  which,  it  was 
known,  was  to  be  the  main  question  at  the  Congress. 

The  Congress  of  Nantes  adopted  a  motion  in  favor  of 
the  general  strike,  appointed  a  "  Committee  for  the  pro- 
paganda of  the  general  strike  "  and  authorized  this  com- 
mittee to  collect  10  per  cent  of  all  subscriptions  for  strikes. 
The  Guesdist  delegates  after  this  vote  left  the  Congress  and 
held  a  separate  Congress  by  themselves. 

The  majority  of  the  delegates  remained  and  voted  the 
creation  of  a  "  National  Council  "  which  should  form  the 
central  organization  of  all  the  syndicats  of  France. 

The  "  National  Council "  functioned  unsatisfactorily. 
At  the  next  general  Congress  in  Limoges  (1895)  the  "  Na- 
tional Council  "  was  abolished  and  the  foundations  of  a 
new  organization  were  laid.  This  new  organization  was 
the  "  General  Confederation  of  Labor  ". 

The  workingmen  had  come  to  recognize  that  political 
divisions  were  disastrous  to  the  growth  of  the  syndicats. 
'The  elimination  of  politics  from  the  syndicats  was,  there- 
fore, adopted  at  Limoges  as  a  condition  of  admission  to 
the  "  General  Confederation  ".  The  first  article  of  the  Sta- 
tutes read : 


301  ] 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  FEDERATION  OF  LABOR 


Among  the  various  syndicats  and  associations  of  syndicats 
of  workingmen  and  of  employes  of  both  sexes  existing  in 
France  and  in  its  Colonies,  there  is  hereby  created  a  uniform 
and  collective  organization  with  the  name  General  Confeder- 
ation of  Labor. 

The  elements  constituting  the  General  Confederation  of 
Labor  will  remain  independent  of  all  political  schools  (en 
dchors  de  toute  ccole  politique). 

The  aim  of  the  Confederation  was  evidently  formulated 
to  satisfy  all  conceptions.  Its  vague  wording  was  as  fol- 
lows :  "  The  General.  Confederation  of  Labor  has  the  ex- 
clusive purpose  of  uniting  the  workingmen,  in  the  economic: 
dQm|3iT3^^  in  the  struggle  for 

their  integral  emancipation."  * 

The  "  General  Confederation  of  Labor  "  incorporated  the 
general  strike  as  part  of  its  program. 

The  creation  of  the  "General  Confederation  of  Labor" 
may  be  considered  the  first  important  manifestation  of  the 
revolutionary  tendency  in  the  syndical  movement  of  France. 
As'Mr.-Leon  de  Seilhac  justly  remarks,  "the  Congress  of 
Limoges  was  a  victory  of  the  syndicalist  revolutionary  party 
over  the  syndicalist  party  of  politics  (Parti  syndical  poli- 
ticicn).  The  victory  was  on  the  side  of  those  who  hailed 
the  general  strike,  who  asserted  the  superiority  of  economic 
action  over  political  and  who  wanted  to  keep  the  syndicats 
independent  of  the  political  parties.  These  ideas  contained 
the  germ  of  revolutionary  syndicalism  and  the  Allemanists 
who  emphasized  them  before  others  may  thus  be  said  to 
have  pointed  out  the  lines  along  which  revolutionary  syn- 
dicalism was  to  develop. 

The  "  General  Confederation  of  Labor  ",  however,  was 
not  founded  by  Allemanists  alone.  Its  organization  was 

1  Seilhac.  Les  Congrcs  Oni'riers,  p.  286. 


72  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [302 

advocated  by  Blanquists  and  non-socialist  workingmen. 
The  Blanquists  had  always  insisted  upon  the  necessity  of 
an  independent  economic  organization  and  had  refused  to 
admit  syndicats  into  their  political  organizations  as  con- 
stituent elements.  The  non-socialist  workingmen,  on  the 
other  hand,  contributed  to  the  foundation  of  the  "  General 
Confederation  "  because  they  felt  the  economic  importance 
of  a  central  syndical  organization. 

The  "General  Confederation  of  Labor"  took  the  place 
of  the  "  National  Federation  of  Syndicats".  The  Gues- 
dists  that  had  split  off  at  the  Congress  of  Nantes  continued 
for  some  time  to  bear  the  title  of  "National  Federation  of 
Syndfe^fs  ",  but  tneir  organization  was  of  no  importance 
and  was  soon  lost  in  the  general  organization  of  the  Parti 

The  "  National  Secretariat  of  Labor  "  died  a  quiet  .death 
(in  1896),  after Tiavmg  expended  the  little  energy  it  had. 
There  were,  therefore,  now  two  central  organizations:  (i) 
The  General  Confederation  of  Labor,  and  (2)  The .Fe.der--- 
ation  of  Bourses. dti  Travail.     In  these  the  further  history, 
of  syndicalism  centers,.,,,. 


CHAPTER  III 

THE  FEDERATION  OF  BOURSES  DU  TRAVAIL.     (1892-1902) 

THE  Bourses  du  Travail  met  an  important  want  in  the 
syndical  life  of  France.  The  local  syndicats  were  generally 
poor  and  could  accomplish  but  little  in  their  isolation.  The 
Bourse  du  Travail  furnished  them  with  a  center  where  they 
could  easily  come  to  a  common  understanding  and  plan 
common  action. 

The  first  Bourse  du  Travail,  as  indicated  above,  was 
opened  by  the  Municipal  Council  of  Paris  in  1887.  In  1892 
there  were  already  fourteen  Bourses  in  existence.  Their 
number  increased  as  follows : 

Year  Bourses  du  Travail 

1894  34 

1896  45 

1898  55 

1899  65 

1900  75 

1902  96 

Outside  of  Paris,  the  initiative  of  creating  a  Bourse  du 
Travail  was  generally  taken  by  the  workingmen  themselves. 
The  local  syndicats  would  elect  a  committee  to  work  out 
statutes  and  a  table  of  probable  expenses  and  income.  The 
project  of  the  committee  would  then  be  submitted  to  the 
general  assembly  of  the  syndicats.  The  assembly  would 
also  elect  an  administrative  council,  a  secretary,  treasurer 
and  other  officers.  The  statutes,  the  list  of  adhering  syn- 
dicats, and  the  names  of  the  administrative  officers  would 
then  be  presented  to  the  municipal  authorities,  and  the 
303]  73 


74  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [304 

Bourse  du  Travail,  which  in  fact  was  aXlocal  federation  of 
unions,  would  be  formally  constituted.  / 

In  many  places,  local  federations  existed  before  1887. 
These  simply  had  to  assume  the  new  title  to  transform 
themselves  into  Bourses  du  Travail.  The  municipalities 
would  then  intervene  and  grant  a  subvention.  Up  to  1902 
inclusive,  the  municipalities  of  France  spent  3,166,159 
francs  in  installing  Bourses  du  Travail,  besides  giving  the 
annual  subventions.  '  In  1902,  the  subvention  received  by 
all  the  Bourses  du  Travail  of  France  from  the  municipali- 
ties amounted  to  197,345  francs,  and  48,550  francs  besides 
were  contributed  to  their  budget  by  the  Departments.1  The 
readiness  of  the  municipal  councils  to  subsidize  the  Bourses 
du  Travail  was  due  mostly,  if  not  always,  to  political  con- 
siderations. 

Though  soliciting  subventions  from  the  municipalities, 
the  syndicats  insisted  on  being  absolutely  independent  in 
the  administration  of  the  Bourses.  The  first  Congress  of 
the  Bourses  du  Travail  in  1892  declared  that: 

Whereas  the  Bourses  du  Travail  must  be  absolutely  inde- 
pendent in  order  to  render  the  services  which  are  expected 
from  them ; 

Whereas  this  institution  constitutes  the  only  reform  which 
the  workingmen  have  wrested  from  the  ruling  class ; 

The  Congress  of  Bourses  du  Travail  of  1892  declares  that 
the  workingmen  must  reject  absolutely  the  meddling  of  the 
administrative  and  governmental  authorities  in  the  functioning 
of  the  Bourses, — an  interference  which  was  manifested  in  the 
declaration  of  public  utility ; 

Invites  the  workingmen  to  make  the  most  energetic  efforts 
in  order  to  guarantee  the  entire  independence  of  the  Bourses 
du  Travail,  and  to  refuse  the  municipalities  if  they  or  the  gov- 
ernment desire  to  interfere  with  their  functioning.2 

1  Annuaire  Statistique. 

2  Seilhac,  Congres  Ouvriers,  p.  231. 


-505]      THE  FEDERATION  OP  BOURSES  DU  TRAVAIL       ,.75 

The  municipalities,  on  the  contrary,  wanted  to  have  some 
control  over  the  funds  they  furnished.  The  result  was 
more  or  less  friction.  In  1894,  the  Congress  of  the  Bourses 
du  Travail  decided  to  demand  that  the  Bourses  be  declared 
institutions  of  public  utility;  this,  it  was  thought,  would  put 
them  under  the  protection  of  the  law  and  make  impossible 
any  hostile  act  on  the  part  of  the  administration.  But  the 
next  year  the  fourth  Congress  of  the  Bourses  du  Travail 
reversed  the  decision  of  the  preceding  Congress  and  de- 
clared for  complete  independence. 

As  the  Bourses  du  Travail  became  more  aggressive,  the 
difficulties  with  regard  to  the  municipalities  increased.  At 
tRe"fifth  congress  of  the  Bourses  du  Travail  1896)  in. 
Tours', "a  report  was  presented  showing  the  Bourses  how 
they  could  exist  without  the  subvention  of  the  municipali- 
ties^. The  question  of  financial  independence  was  brought 
up  at  later  Congresses,  but  received  no  solution.  The 
Bourses  could  not  live  on  their  own  resources,  while  they 
continued  the  activities  which  brought  them  now  and  then 
into  conflict  with  the  municipal  authorities. 

'\The  program  which  the  Bourses  du  Travail  gradually 
outlined  for  themselves  has  been  classified  under  four 
heads :  ( i )  Benevolent  Services,  or  as  the  French  term  it 
Mutualite;  (2)  Instruction;  (3)  Propaganda;  and  (4)  Re- 
sistance.^- 

The  services  of  Mutualite  included  finding  employment 
for  workingmen  out  of  work  (Placement},  assistance  to 
workmen  who  go  from  city  to  city  in  search  of  employ- 
ment (Viaticum},  aid  to  other  unemployed  persons,  sick 
benefit,  etc.;  The  Bourses  paid  particular  attention  to  the 

1  On  the  Bourses  du  Trarai!  see,  F.  Pclloutier,  Plistoire  des  Bourses 
du  Travail,  1502;  Ch.  Franck,  Les  Bourses  du  Travail  el  la  Confeder- 
ation Generate  du  Travail.  TOIO;  P.  Delesalle.  Les  Bourses  du  Travail 
et  la  C.  G.  T.  (Paris,  igio). 


76  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [306 

service  of  placement.  Relloutier,  the^ecretaf^of^lm  Fed- 
eration of  Bourses^ jyrote.; 

The  Placement  is  in  fact  the  first  and  greatest  advantage  which 
the  federative  grouping  can  offer  to  the  workingmen,  and  it 
constitutes  a  powerful  instrument  of  recruiting.  In  consequence 
of  the  instability  of  employment,  the  use  of  private  employment 
bureaus  for  whose  services  payment  has  to  be  made,  soon  be- 
comes so  onerous  that  many  workingmen  exasperated  by  the 
necessity  of  deducting  from  their  future  wages  (which  are 
more  and  more  reduced)  considerable  tithes  for  the  services 
of  employment  bureaus,  prefer  often — though  losing  thereby 
— to  spend  their  time  in  search  of  a  place  which  will  secure  a 
livelihood.  Besides,  it  is  known — and  the  proceedings  of  Par- 
liament have  furnished  decisive  proof — that  the  habitual  prac- 
tice of  the  employment  bureaus  is  to  procure  the  most  pre- 
carious employments  so  as  to  multiply  the  number  of  visits 
which  the  workingmen  will  have  to  pay  them.  It  is  there- 
fore easy  to  understand  the  readiness  with  which  the  unfor- 
tunates go  to  the  Bourse  du  Travail,  which  offers  desired  em- 
ployment gratuitously.  In  this  manner  men  who  would  hold 
aloof  from  the  syndicats  out  of  ignorance  or  indifference,  en- 
ter them  under  the  pressure  of  need  and  find  there  instruc- 
tion, the  utility  and  importance  of  which  escaped  them  before.1 

The  services  of  instruction  comprised  the  founding  of 
libraries,  the  organization  of  technical  courses,  the  arrange- 
ment of  lectures  on  general  subjects  (economic,  literary, 
historical,  etc.),  workingmen's  journals,  bureaus  of  infor- 
mation, etc. 

The  propaganda  of  the  Bourses  had  for  its  general-aim- 
the  intellectual  development  of  the  workingman  and  the 
extension  of  the  syndical  movement.  The  Bourse's  ""were 
to  support  the  syndicats  in  existence,  organize  new  ones, 
promote  the  adherence  of  single  syndicats  to  their  national 

1  Pelloutier,  op.  cit.,  pp.  87-88. 


307]      THE  FEDERATION  OF  BOURSES  DU  TRAVAIL        77 

federations,  carry  on  a  propaganda  among  the  agricultural 
laborers  and  perform  other  functions  of  a  similar  character. 

The  services  of  resistance  consisted  in  lending  material 
and  moral  aid  to  the  workingmen  in  their  economic  strug- 
gles. The  Bourses  regarded  themselves  mainly  as  societies 
of  resistance  whose  principal  function  was  to  support  the 
workingmen  in  struggle.  The  other  functions  were  con- 
sidered subordinate  to  this  main  service. 

Every  Bourse  carried  out  this  program  only  in  propor- 
tion to  its  means.  The  Bourses  differed  a  great  deal  in 
number  of  adherents,  in  financial  resources,  in  command  of 
organizers,  etc.  Some  consisted  of  a  few  syndicats  with  a 
few  dozen  members  only;  others  comprised  tens  of  syndi- 
cats with  thousands  of  organized  workingmen  and  with  a 
budget  running  into  the  thousands. 

A  few  figures  may  help  to  form  some  idea  of  the  extent 
of  the  services  rendered  by  the  Bourses  du  Travail  during 
the  period  considered  in  this  chapter.  The  number  of  posi- 
tions filled  by  the  Bourses  were  as  follows : 

Applications  Offers  Placed  Placed 

Year  for  employment  of  employment  at  residence     a-way  from  residence 

1895 38,141         17,190         15,031         5,335 

1898  83,648        45,46i         47,237        38,159 

1902  99,330        60,737        44,63i         30,544 1 

The  service  of  viaticum  was  organized  differently  by 
different  Bourses.  Some  paid  one  franc  a  day,  others  one 
and  one-half  and  two  francs.  In  many  Bourses  the  travel- 
ing workingmen  received  part  only  of  the  viaticum  in 
money,  the  rest  in  kind  (tickets  to  restaurants,  lodging, 
etc.).  The  reports  of  the  Bourses  presented  to  their  Con- 
gress at  Paris  in  1900,  contain  some  information  on  the 
subject.  The  Bourse  of  Alger  spent  from  600  to  700 
francs  a  year  on  the  service  of  viaticum.  The  Bourse  of 

1  Annuaire  Statistique. 


78  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [308 

Bordeaux  distributed  during  certain  months  about  130 
francs,  during  others,  only  60;  other  Bourses  spent  much 
less.  The  following  table  presents  the  amounts  spent  in 
successive  years  by  the  Bourse  of  Rennes : 

Assistance 
Year  Passing  Workmen     Francs     Centimes 

1894 25  37  50 

1895  22  33 

1896  47  60  50 

1897  4i  81 

1898  (till  Sept.)   ....  32  64 

In  organizing  technical  courses,  the  Bourses  du  Travail 
pursued  the  aim  of  fighting  "  the  dominant  tendency  in 
modern  industry  to  make  of  the  child  a  laborer,  an  uncon- 
scious accessory  of  the  machine,  instead  of  making  him  an 
intelligent  collaborator."  x  Again  in  this  respect  the  ser- 
vices of  the  Bourses  varied.  In  the  Bourse  of  Etienne, 
597  courses  of  two  hours  each  were  attended  by  426  pupils 
from  October  i,  1899,  to  June  30,  1911.  The  Bourse  of 
Marseilles  had  in  1900  courses  in  carpentry,  metallurgy, 
typography  and  others.  The  Bourse  of  Toulouse  organized 
20  courses  and  had  its  own  typographical  shop. 

Nearly  all  Bourses  organized  their  own  libraries,  some 
of  which  consisted  of  several  hundred  volumes,  while  the 
library  of  the  Bourse  du  Travail  of  Paris  contained  over 
2,000  volumes.  Besides,  every  large  Bourse  had  its  period- 
ical, weekly  or  monthly.2 

The  Federation  des  Bourses   du    Travail  was   formed 
in  1892  to  systematize  and  to  unify  the  activities of -4ke- 
Bourses.     Though  it  owed  its  origin  to  political  motives, 
the  Federation  soon  devoted  its  main  energies  to  the  ec.o-_ 
nomic  functions  of  the  Bourses  which  if  tried  to  extend  and 

1  Pelloutier,  op.  cit.,  pp.  121-2. 

2  There  were  23  in  1907.    Franck,  op.  cit.,  pp.  127-8. 


209]      THE  FEDERATION  OF  BOURSES  DU  TRAVAIL        79 

to  strengthen.  This  turn  in  its  policy  the  Federation  owed 
chiefly  to  Ferriand  Pelloutier,  who  became  secretary  of  the 
Federation  in  1894  and  who  remained  in  this  post  till  his 
death  in.  1901. 

"FernancT^Pellotttier  (1867-1901)  came  from  a  bour- 
geois family  and  was  educated  in  a  Catholic  school.1  He 
entered  political  life  at  an  early  age  in  a  provincial  town 
(St.  Nazaire),  as  an  advanced  republican,  but  soon  passed 
into  the  socialist  ranks.  Though  a  member  of  the  Parti 
Ouvrier  (Guesdists),  he  defended  the  general  strike  in 
1892"  before ''a  socialist  Congress  in  Tours.  This  caused 
"his  break  with  the  Parti  Ouvrier.  In  1893  ne  came  to 
PaTfs~"and "here  came  under  the  influence  of  the  Anarchist- 
Communists,  whose  ideas  he  fully  accepted  and  professed 
to  his  last  day. 

Pelloutier.;  was  appointed,  secretary  of  the  Federation  of 
Bourses  in  order  to  assure  the  political  neutrality  of  the  or- 
ganization. As  indicated  in  the  previous  chapter,  the  Fed- 
eration owed  its  birth  largely  to  the  political  interests  of  the 
Allemanists.  The  Federation,  however,  soon  found  itself 
composed  of  various  elements — Blanquists,  Guesdists,  etc. 
— but  the  economic  interests  which  stimulated  the  growth 
of  the  Bourses  were  strong  enough  to  create  a  desire  on  the 
part  of  the  workingmen  to  avoid  political  dissensions  and 
quarrels.  An  anarchist  at  the  head  of  the  Federation 
seemed  to  guarantee  the  necessary  neutrality. 

Fernand  Pelloutier  realized  the  expectations  placed  in 
him.  He  was  disgusted  with  politics  and  his  "  dream  was 
to  oppose  a  strong,  powerful  economic  action  to  political 
action."  The  Federation  of  Bourses  became  his  absorb- 
ing interest  in  life.  To  it  he  devoted  most  of  his  time  and 

1  On  the  life  of  Pelloutier  see  Maurice  Pelloutier,  F.  Pelloutier.     Sa 
Vie,  son  Qeui~re  (Paris,  1911). 

2  P.  Delessale,  Temps  Nouvcoux,  23  Mars,  1901. 


go  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [310 

energy.  He  proved  himself  a  man  of  steady  purpose,  of 
methodical  procedure,  and  of  high  organizing  abilities.  He 
has  been  recognized  as  the  most  able  organizer  of  the  work- 
ing class  that  modern  France  has  produced.  His  ser- 
vices to  the  development  of  the  syndicalist  movement  have 
been  recognized  by  men  of  various  opinions  and  political 
convictions.  M.  Seilhac  wrote  of  him  in  1897,  "  a  young 
man,  intelligent,  educated,  sprung  from  the  bourgeoisie, 
has  just  entered  the  Federation  as  Secretary;  M.  F.  Pel- 
loutier  has  led  the  Federation  with  a  talent  and  a  surety  of 
judgment  which  his  most  implacable  enemies  must  acknowl- 
edge. Having  passed  through  the  '  Guesdist '  school,  M. 
Pelloutier  violently  broke  away  from  this  intolerant  and 
despotic  party  and  was  attracted  by  pure  anarchism.  The 
Federation  owes  its  rapid  success  in  great  measure  to 
him."  x 

In  1892  the  Federation  was  formed  by  ten  Bourses  out 
of  the  fourteen  then  in  existence.  Its  growth  was  as  fol- 
lows: 

Year  Bourses         Syndicats 

1895  34  606 

1896  46  862 

1897  40  627 

1898  5i  947 

1899  54  98i 

1900  57  1,061 

1902  83  1,112 

The  Federation  was  represented  by  a  Federal  Committee 
in  Paris.  Each  Bourse  had  the  right  to  a  delegate  in  the 
Committee,  but  a  single  delegate  could  represent  several 
Bourses.  As  the  Federal  Committee  was  in  Paris,  the  dele- 
gates were  not  members  of  the  Bourses  they  represented. 
They  were  chosen  by  the  Bourses  from  a  list  sent  to  them 

1  Seilhac,  Congres  Ouvriers,  p.  272. 


3i  i  ]      THE  FEDERATION  OF  BOURSES  DU  TRAVAIL        8l 

by  the  Secretary  of  the  Federation  and  made  up  of  men 
either  personally  known  by  him  or  recommended  to  him. 
This  gave  rise  to  dissatisfaction,  and  it  was  decided  that 
the  secretary  should  complete  the  list  of  candidates  with 
remarks  on  their  political  attachments,  so  that  the  Bourses 
might  choose  representatives  expressing  exactly  their  opin- 
ions. 

In  this  way  the  Federal  Committee  came  to  be  composed 
of  various  political  elements.  In  1899  there  were  48 
Bourses  in  the  Federation;  of  these  three  were  represented 
in  the  Federal  Committee  by  Blanquists,  eleven  by  Alle- 
manists,  five  by  Guesdists.  The  last  named  soon  left  the 
Federation ;  the  rest  did  not  adhere  to  any  party.  "  Within 
the  group  of  their  representatives  particularly,"  wrote 
Pelloutier,  "  must  one  look  for  those  convinced  libertar- 
ians 1  whom  the  Bourses  have  maintained  as  delegates  re- 
gardless of  the  reproaches  of  certain  socialist  schools,  and 
who,  without  fuss,  have  done  so  much  for  some  years  to 
enhance  the  individual  energy  and  the  development  of  the 
syndicats."  The  Committee  had  no  executive  officers,  not 
even  a  chairman.  The  business  was  done  by  the  secretary, 
an  assistant  secretary  and  a  treasurer.  The  first  received 
1,200  francs  a  year.  Each  session  began  with  the  reading 
of  the  minutes  of  the  preceding  session,  and  of  the  corres- 
pondence; then  the  discussion  of  the  questions  raised  by  the 
correspondence,  inscribed  on  the  order  of  the  day,  or  raised 
by  the  delegates,  occurred.  A  vote  took  place  only  in  cases, 
"  extremely  rare  ",  when  an  irreconciliable  divergence  of 
views  sprang  up.  The  meetings  took  place  twice  a  month. 

Pelloutier  wrote : 

The  suppression  of  the  chairmanship  and  of  useless  voting 

1  The  anarchists  in  France  call  themselves  libcrtaires. 

2  Pelloutier,  op.  cit.,  p.  151. 


82  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [312 

dates  only  from  the  entrance  of  the  libertarians  into  the  Com- 
mittee, but  experience  soon  convinced  all  members  that  be- 
tween serious  and  disinterested  men  there  is  no  necessity  of 
a  monitor  because  everyone  considers  it  an  honor  to  respect  the 
freedom  of  discussion  and  even,  (without  wavering  from  his 
principles)  to  conduct  the  debate  in  a  conversational  tone. 

The  FederaLCommittee  proceeded  in, a. jriethodical^way. 
Between  1894-1896  it  devoted  itself  mainly  to  propaganda 
and  to  organization.  It  invited  the  local  syndicats  and 
unions  of  syndicats  to  constitute  themselves  into  Bourses 
du  Travail.  To  guide  them  Pelloutier  wrote  a  little  pamph- 
let on  The  method  of  organising  and  maintaining  Bourses 
du  Travail.  After  1895  the  Federal  Committee  thought 
the  multiplication  of  Bourses  too  rapid.  The  Committee 
feared  that  the  Bourses  were  constituting  themselves  with- 
out sufficient  syndical  strength  and  that  they  were  putting 
themselves  at  the  mercy  of  a  dissolution  or  of  an  unsuccess- 
ful strike. 

The  Committee,  therefore,  thought  it  wise  if  not  to  moderate 
the  organizing  enthusiasm  of  the  militant  workingmen,  at 
least  to  call  their  attention  to  the  utility  of  extending  to  ar- 
rondissements,  sometimes  even  to  an  entire  department,  a  pro- 
paganda which  was  till  then  limited  to  a  local  circle.  Two  or 
three  Bourses  per  Department,  wrote  Pelloutier,  would  group 
the  workingmen  more  rapidly  and  at  the  cost  of  less  efforts 
than  seven  or  eight  insufficiently  equipped  and  necessarily 
weak.1 

In  1897,  at  the  Congress  of  Toulouse,  Pelloutier  read 
two  reports  in  which  he  invited  the  Bourses  du  Travail  to 
extend  their  activities  to  the  agricultural  population  and  to 
the  sailors.  These  reports  reveal  a  thorough  study  of  the 
conditions  in  which  these  two  classes  of  the  population 

1  F.  Pelloutier,  op.  cit.,  p.  77. 


313]      THE  FEDERATION  OF  BOURSES  DU  TRAVAIL        83 

spend  their  lives,  and  contain  indications  how  to  attract 
them  to  syndical  activity.  Pelloutier  recommended  the 
Bourses  to  create  commissions  which  should  be  specially 
devoted  to  agricultural  problems  and  which  should  train 
propagandists  for  the  country.  He  also  recommended  the 
institution  of  homes  for  sailors  in  the  ports. 

Some  Bourses  acted  on  the  suggestion  of  Pelloutier  and 
since  then  dates  the  propaganda  carried  on  by  some  Bourses 
among  the  wood-cutters,  the  wine-growers,  the  agricultural 
laborers,  the  fishermen,  sailors  and  similar  groups  of  the 
working  population. 

From  1898  to  1900  the  Federal  Committee  was  trying 
to  systematize  the  services  of  the  placement  and  of  the 
viaticum.  The  suggestion  came  from  some  Bourses,  which 
particularly  felt  this  necessity.  Some  Bourses  had  already 
been  placing  workmgmen  at  a  distance  through  correspond- 
ence. They  wanted  to  generalize  this  by  having  the  Fed- 
eral Committee  publish  statistics  of  the  fluctuations  of  em- 
ployment in  the  various  Bourses.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
Bourses  had  difficulties  with  the  service  of  viaticum.  The 
diversity  of  conditions  in  this  respect  gave  rise  to  dissatis- 
faction, while  the  Bourses  were  unable  to  control  abuses. 
The  secretaries  could  not  know  the  number  of  visits  paid 
them  by  workingmen,  nor  the  amounts  received  by  each. 

At  the  Congress  of  Rennes  (1898),  the  Federal  Com- 
mittee presented  a  plan  of  a  "  federal  viaticum  ",  and  in 
1900,  the  Office  national  de  statistique  ct  de  placement  was 
organized.  The  "federal  viaticum"  was  optional  for  mem- 
bers of  the  federation,  and  though  presenting  certain  ad- 
vantages for  the  Bourses,  was  accepted  by  very  few  of 
them.  Organized  in  1899,  it  functioned  unsatisfactorily. 

The  Office  national  began  activity  in  June,  1900.  It 
was  organized  with  the  financial  aid  of  the  government. 
In  TOOO.  after  the  Universal  Exhibition,  Paris  was  over- 


84  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [314 

crowded  with  unemployed  workingmen,  and  the  govern- 
ment thought  it  could  make  use  of  the  Federation  of 
Bourses  to  disperse  them  over  the  country.  Before  that,  in 
November,  1899,  the  Federal  Committee  had  addressed  the 
government  for  a  subsidy  of  10,000  francs  to  organize  the 
Office  national.  In  June,  1900,  the  Government  granted 
5,000  francs.  The  Office  began  to  publish  a  weekly 
statistical  bulletin  containing  the  information  on  the  fluctu- 
ation of  employment  sent  to  the  Federal  Committee  by  the 
Bourses.  The  Office,  however,  did  not  give  the  expected 
results.  In  organizing  these  services,  the  Federation  of 
Bourses  always  kept  in  mind  the  interests  of  the  syndicats. 
It  directed  workingmen  to  employers  who  satisfied  the  gen- 
eral conditions  imposed  by  the  syndicats.  The  viaticum 
also  served  to  diminish  competition  among  workingmen  in 
ordinary  times,  or  during  strikes. 

'In  .all  its  activity  the  Federal  Committee  generally  fol- 
lowed the  same  policy.  It  called  the  attention  of  one  Bourse 
to  the  experiments  and  to  the  achievements  of  others;  it 
made  its  own  suggestions  and  recommendations  and  it  car- 
ried out  the  decisions  of  the  Congresses.  It  did  not  regard 
itself  as  a  central  organ  with  power  to  command.  Con- 
stituted on  a  federalist  basis,  the  Bourses  jexpected  from 
the  Federal  Committee  merely  the  preliminary  study  of 
problems  of  a  common  interest,  reserving  for  themselves 
the  right  to  reject  both  the  problems  and -the.  study;  they 
considered  even  their  Congresses  merely  as  foyers  where 
the  instruments  of  discussion  and  of  work  were  forged.1 

The  activity  of  the  Federal  Committee  was  handicapped 
by  insufficiency  of  means.  The  financial  state  of  the  Fed- 
eration between  1892  and  1902  may  be  gathered  from  the 
following  table: 

1  F.  Pelloutier,  op.  cit.,  p.  154. 


315]      THE  FEDERATION  OF  BOURSES  DU  TRAVAIL        85 

Receipts  Expenses 

Francs  Centimes  Francs  Centimes 

1892-1893   247  209  45 

1893-1894  573  95  378  95 

1894-1895   i,342  55  960  07 

1895-1896  2,380  05  1,979 

1896-1897   2,310  75  1,779  45 

1897-1900  6,158  75  5,521  45 

1900-1901    4,297  85  3,029  71 

1901-1902  5,54i—  85  4,320  80 

\  The  Bourses  paid  their  clues  irregularly  and  Pelloutier 
complained  that  with  such  means  the  Committee  could  not 
render  all  the  services  it  was  capable  of  and  that  it  was 
necessarily  reduced  to  the  role  of  a  correspondence  bureau, 
"  slow  and  imperfect  in  its  working." 

Whatever  others  may  have  thought  of  the  results  ob- 
tained by  the  Federation  of  Bourses,  the  leaders  themselves 
felt  enthusiastic  about  the  things  accomplished.  Pelloutier 
wrote : 

Enumerate  the  results  obtained  by  the  groupings  of  working- 
men  :  consult  the  program,  of  the  courses  instituted  by  the 
Bourses  du  Travail,  a  program  which  omits  nothing  which 
goes  to  make  up  a  moral,  complete,  dignified  and  satisfied  life; 
regard  the  authors  who  inhabit  the  vvorkingmen's  libraries ; 
admire  this  syndical  and  co-operative  organization  which  ex- 
tends from  day  to  day  and  embraces  new  categories  of  pro- 
ducers, the  unification  of  all  the  proletarian  forces  into  a 
close  network  of  syndicats,  of  co-operative  societies,  of 
leagues  of  resistance ;  consider  the  constantly  increasing  in- 
tervention into  the  diverse  manifestations  of  social  life;  the 
examination  of  methods  of  production  and  of  distribution 
and  say  whether  this  organization,  whether  this  program,  this 
tendency  towards  the  beautiful  and  the  good,  whether  this 
aspiration  toward  the  complete  expansion  of  the  individual  do 
not  justify  the  pride  the  Bourses  du  Travail  feel.1 

1  F.  Pelloutier,  op.  cit.,  pp.  170-1. 


86  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [3x6 

This  feeling  and  the  preoccupation  with  socialist  ideals 
led  Pelloutier  and  other  members  of  the  Federation  to 
think  that  the  Bourses  du  Travail  could  not  only  render 
immediate  services,  but  that  they  were  capable  of  "  adapt- 
ing themselves  to  a  superior  social  order ".  Pelloutier 
thought  that  the  Bourses  du  Travail  were  evolving  from 
this  time  on  the  elements  of  a  new  society,  that  they  were 
gradually  constituting  a  veritable  socialist  (economic  and 
anarchic)  state  within  the  bourgeois  state,1  and  that  they 
would  in  time,  substitute  communistic  forms  of  production 
and  of  distribution  for  those  now  in  existence.  The  ques- 
tion was  brought  up  for  discussion  at  the  Congress  of 
Tours  (1896)  and  two  reports  were  read  on  the  present 
and  future  role  of  the  Bourses  du  Travail.  One  report 
was  written  by  Pelloutier,  the  other  was  prepared  by  the 
delegates  of  the  Bourse  of  Nimes,  Claude  Gignoux  and 
Victorien  Briguier  (Allemanists). 

The  report  of  the  Bourse  of  Nimes  starts  out  from  the 
idea  that  no  new  plan  of  a  future  society  need  be  fabri- 
cated ;  that  the  Bourses  du  Travail  show  themselves  already 
capable  of  directing  the  economic  activities  of  society  and 
that  with  further  growth  they  will  become  more  and  more 
capable  of  so  doing.  The^jiatural  development  of  the 
Bourses,  ~it  1ield,  leads  them  to  investigate  thejtiumber  of 
unemployed  in  each  trade;  the  causes  of  industrial  pertur- 
bation, the  cost  of  maintenance  of  each  individual  in  com- 
parison with  wages  received;  the  number  of  trades  and  of 
workingmen  employed  in  them;  the  amount  of  the  produce; 
the  totality  of  products  necessary  for  the  population  of  their 
region,  etc.,  etc.  ,'Now,  it  further  set  forth,  with  all  this 
information  at  hand,  and  with  all  this  economic  experi- 
ence, each  Bourse  could,  in  case  of  a  social  transformation, 

1  F.  Pelloutier,  op.  cit.,  p.  160. 


317]      THE  FEDERATION  OF  BOURSES  DU  TRAVAIL        87 

assume  the  direction  of  the  industrial  life  of  its  region. 
Each  trade  organized  in  a  syndicat  would  elect  a  council 
of  labor;  the  syndicats  of  the  same  trade  would  be  feder- 
ated nationally  and  internationally.  The  Bourses,  knowing 
the  quantity  of  products  which  must  be  produced,  would  im- 
part this  information  to  the  councils  of  labor  of  each  trade, 
which  employ  all  members  of  the  trade  in  the  manufacture 
of  necessary  products.  By  their  statistics,  the  Bourses 
would  know  where  there  is  excess  or  want  of  production  in 
their  regions,  and  would  determine  the  exchange  of  pro- 
ducts between  the  territories  which  by  nature  are  adapted 
for  some  special  production  only.  The  report  presupposed 
that  property  would  become  "  social  and  inalienable  " ;  and 
the  assumption  was  that  the  workingmen  would  be  stimu- 
lated to  develop  the  industrial  powers  of  their  regions  and 
to  increase  the  material  welfare  of  the  country.  The  re- 
port concluded : 

This  summary  outline  gives  those  who  live  in  the  syndical 
movement  an  idea  of  the  role  which  falls  and  will  fall  to  the 
Bourses  du  Travail.  It  would  not  do  to  hurry  decisions ;  the 
methodical  pursuit  of  the  development  of  our  institutions  is 
sufficient  to  realize  our  aim,  and  to  avoid  many  disappoint- 
ments and  retrogressions.  It  is  for  us,  who  have  inherited 
the  thought  and  the  science  of  all  those  who  have  come  be- 
fore us,  to  bring  it  about  that  so  many  riches  and  so  much 
welfare  due  to  their  genius  should  not  serve  to  engender 
misery  and  injustice,  but  should  establish  harmony  of  inter- 
ests on  equality  of  rights  and  on  the  solidarity  of  all  human 
beings.1 

The  report  of  the  Federal  Committee,  prepared  by  Pel- 
loutier,  contained  the  same  ideas  but  emphasized  some  other 
points.  "  We  start  out  from  the  principle,"  read  this  re- 

1  F.  Pelloutier,  op.  cit.,  p.  163. 


88  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [318 

port,  "  that  the  task  of  the  revolution  is  to  free  mankind 
not  only  from  all  authority  (autorite),  but  also  from  every 
institution  which  has  not  for  its  essential  purpose  the  de- 
velopment of  production.  Consequently,  we  can  imagine 
the  future  society  only  as  a  voluntary  and  free  association 
of  producers."  *  In  this  social  system  the  syndicats  and 
the  Bourses  are  to  play  the  part  assigned  to  them  in  the 
report  of  the  Bourse  of  Nimes. 

The  consequence  of  this  new  state,  of  this  suppression  of  use- 
less social  organs,  of  this  simplification  of  necessary  machin- 
ery, will  be  that  man  will  produce  better,  more  and  quicker; 
that  he  will  be  able,  therefore,  to  devote  long  hours  to  his  in- 
tellectual development,  to  accelerate  in  this  way  mechanical 
progress,  to  free  himself  more  and  more  from  painful  work, 
and  to  arrange  his  life  in  greater  conformity  to  his  instinctive 
aspirations  toward  studious  repose. 

Pelloutier  laid  emphasis  on  the  idea  that  this  future  state 
was  being  gradually  prepared  and  was  dependent  upon  the 
intellectual  and  moral  development  of  the  working-class ;  he 
conceived  it  as  a  gradual  substitution  of  institutions  evolved 
by  the  working-class  for  those  institutions  which  charac- 
terize existing  society.  He....  believed  that  the  _  syndicalist 
life... was  the  only  means  of  stimulating  the  power  and  the 
initiatiye_o|  Jhe  workingmen  and  of  .developing ^  their  .ad- 
ministrative abilities.  His  report,  quoted  above,  concluded : 
"  And  this  is  the  future  in  store  for  the  working-class,  if 
becoming  conscious  of  its  intellectual  faculties,  and  o  fit's 
dignity,  it  will  come  to  draw  only  from  within  itself  its 
notion  of  social  duty,  will  detest  and  break  every  authority 
foreign  to  it  and  will  finally  conquer  security  and  liberty." 

This  conception  of  the  syndicat  has  since  become  funda- 

1  F.  Pelloutier,  op.  cit.,  pp.  163-4. 

2  Seilhac,  Congres  Ouvriers,  p.  317. 


319]      THE  FEDERATION  OF  BOURSES  DU  TRAVAIL        89 

mental  with  revolutionary  syndicalists.  Formulating  it,  the 
FjrtJrjaliaiLidz5:~B~oiirses  du  Travail  really  laid  the  foun- 
dations of  what  later  became  revolutionary  syndicalism. 
The  " Feeler ation  of  Bourses"  also  made  the  first  step  in 
the  propaganda  of  anti-militarism  and  in  outlining  a  policy 
of  opposition  to  the  State.  The  latter  ideas,  however,  were 
at  "the '__sarne_time  developed  in  the  General  Confederation 
of  Labor  and  will  be  considered  in  connection  with  the  his- 
tory of  that  body  in  the  next  chapter.  } 

From  1894  to  1902  the  Federation  des  Bourses  du  Tra- 
vail was  the  strongest  syndical  organization  in  France. 
Pelloutier  claimed  250,000  members  for  it,  but  the  figure 
is  exaggerated.  There  is  no  way,  however,  of  finding  out 
the  true  figures. 

^Conscious  of  its  comparative  strength,  the  Federation  of 
Bourses  at  times  ignored,  at  times  dominated  the  General 
Confederation  of  Labor.  These  two  organizations  were 
rivals.  The  General  Confederation  of  Labor  had  adopted 
at  Limoges  (1895)  statutes  according  to  which  the  Confed- 
eration could  admit  not  .only  National  Federations  of  Syn- 
dicats,  "but  sfngle  syndicate  and  single  Bourses.  This  was 
obnoxious  to  the  Federation  of  Bourses.  The  latter  wished 
that  the  General  Confederation  should  be  composed  exclu- 
sively of  two  federal  committees ;  one  representing  the  Fed- 
eration of  Bourses;  the  other  representing  the  National 
Federations  of  trade.  Until  this  was  accepted,  the  Fed- 
eration of  Bourses,  at  its  Congress  in  Tours  (1896),  re- 
fused to  give  any  financial  aid  to  the  General  Confederation 
in  view  "  of  the  little  vitality  "  which  it  displayed. 

The  General  Confederation  of  Labor  modified  its  sta- 
tutes year  after  year,  but  no  harmony  between  the  two  or- 
ganizations could  be  established  for  some  thne.  In  1897, 
the  Federation  of  Bourses  joined  the  General  Confedera- 
tion, but  left  it  again  in  1898. 


^o  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [320 

The  friction  was  due  partly  to  personal  difficulties,  partly 
to  the  differences  of  spirit  which  prevailed  in  the  central 
committees  of  the  two  organizations.  After  1900,  how- 
ever, the  two  organizations,  though  distinct,  co-operated, 
and  the  question  of  unifying  the  two  organizations  was 
more  and  more  emphasized.  In  1902,  at  the  Congress  of 
Montpellier,  this  unity  was  realized ;  the  Federation  o£ 
Bourses  entered  the  General  Confederation  of  Labor,  and 
ceased  to  have  a  separate  existence. 


CHAPTER  IV 

THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR  FROM  1895  TO 

1902 

THE  General  Confederation  of  Labor  has  continued  its 
existence  under  the  same  name  since  its  foundation  in 
1895.  Still  the  period  from  1895  to  1902  may  be  con- 
sidered separately  for  two  reasons :  first,  during  this 
period  the  organization  of  the  Confederation  under 
which  it  now  functions  was  evolved  ; r  and  secondly,  dur- 
ing this  period  the  tendency  known  as  revolutionary 
syndicalism  became  definite  and  complete.  This  period 
may  be  considered  therefore  as  the  formative  period 
both  from  the  point  of  view  of  organization  and  from 
the  point  of  view  of  doctrine. 

The  gradual  elaboration  of  organization  and  of  doc- 
trine may  best  be  considered  from  year  to  year.  The 
700  syndicats  which  formed  the  General  Confederation 
at  Limoges  in  1895  aimed  to  "  establish  among  them- 
selves daily  relations  which  would  permit  them  to  for- 
mulate in  common  the  demands  studied  individually ; 
they  wanted  also  and  particularly  to  put  an  end  to  the 
disorganization  which  penetrated  their  ranks  under  cover 
of  the  political  spirit."2 

The  Congress  held  the  following  year  at  Tours  (1896) 

1  The  changes  in  the   form  of  organization  which  have  been  made 
since    1902   are   in  harmony   with   the   fundamental   ideas   of  the   con- 
stitution adopted  in  1902. 

2  XI  Congrcs  National  Corporatif  (Paris,  1900),  p.  35. 

321]  91 


g2  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [322 

showed  that  the  aim  was  not  attained.  ;   Only  32  organi- 
zations had  paid  the  initiation  fee  (two  francs)   as  re- 
quested by  the  statutes  adopted  at  Limoges.     Of  the  32 
only  four,  the  Fkdkration  des  Travailleurs  du  Livre*  the 
Syndicat  of  Railway  Men,  the  Circle  of  Machinists,  and 
the  Federation  of   Porcelain  Workers,  paid   their  .dues_ 
regularly ;  the  rest  paid  irregularly  or  did  not  pay  at  alJL, 
The  entire  income  for  the  year  amounted  to.  740  francs.2 

The  National  Council  of  the  Confederation  did  not 
function  because  the  number  of  delegates  elected  by  the 
adhering  organizations  was  insufficient  to  constitute  the 
committees  among  which  the  work  was  to  be  divided. 
The  few  delegates  that  did  attend  the  meetings  quarreled 
for  political  and  other  reasons.  The  Federation  of 
Bourses  showed  itself  hostile,  because  the  statutes 
adopted  at  Limoges  admitted  Bourses,  single  syn.dicats, 
local  and  regional  federations.  ^ 

The  "  Committee  for  the  propaganda  of  the  General 
Strike"  could  also  report  but  little  progress.  The  Com- 
mittee had  been  authorized  by  the  Congress  of  Nantes 
(1894)  to  collect  10  per  cent  of  all  subscriptions  for 
strikes.  The  Committee,  however,  reported  to  the  Con- 
gress of  Tours,  that  the  syndicats  and  Bourses  did  not 
live  up  to  the  decision.  From  December  i,  1894,  to 
September  12,  1892,  329  francs  75  centimes  was  col- 
lected ;  for  1895-96,  401  francs  95  centimes.  With  such 
limited  means  but  little  headway  could  be  made.3 

The  Congress  of  Tours  tried  to  remedy  the  situation 
by  making  several  changes  in  the  statutes.  Single 
Bourses  were  not  to  be  admitted.  This  was  a  conces- 
sion to  the  Federation  of  Bourses,  which  was  invited  to 

1  Typographical  Union.  *  Seilhac,  p.  328. 

*  Seilhac,  Congres  Ouvriers,  p.  325 ;  Ch.  Franck,  op.  cit.,  p.  323. 


THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR 


93 


join  the  Confederation  ;  single  syndicats  were  to  be  ad- 
mitted only  if  there  were  no  national  federations  in  their 
trades.  Each  National  Federation  of  trade  or  of  in- 
dustry could  send  three  delegates  to  the  National  Coun- 
cil ;  syndicats  and  local  federations,  only  one.1,  Each 
delegate  to  the  National  Council  could  represent  two 
organizations  only,  while  formerly  he  could  represent 
five.  The  National  Council  was  to  nominate  an  execu- 
tive committee  consisting  of  a  secretary,  assistant  secre- 
tary, treasurer,  assistant  treasurer,  and  archivist.  The 
work  of  the  Confederation  was  to  be  divided  among 
seven  committees.  Dues  were  to  be  paid  on  a  graduated 
scale  according  to  membership. 

Besides  modifying  the  statutes,  the  Congress  of  Tours 
discussed  several  other  questions  ;  eight-hour  day,  weekly 
rest,  the  general  strike  and  the  establishment  of  a  trade 
organ. 

The  idea  of  the  general  strike,  defended  by  Alemanists 
and  anarchists,  was  indorsed  by  the  Congress  with  a 
greater  majority  than  at  previous  Congresses.  By  this 
time,  however,  several  modifications  had  taken  place  in  the 
conception  of  the  general  strike.  These  were  emphasized 
by  M.  Guerard  who  defended  the  idea  before  the  Congress. 
Said  M.  Guerard  : 

The  conquest  of  political  power  is  a  chimera  ;  there  are  at 
present  only  three  or  four  true  socialists  in  the  Chamber  of 
Deputies  out  of  585.  Of  36,000  communes,  only  150  have  as 
yet  been  conquered.  v 

The  partial  strikes  fail  because  the  workingmen  become  de- 
moralized and  succumb  under  the  intimidation  of  the  employ- 
ers protected  by  the  government.  The  general  strike  will  last 
a  short  while  and  its  repression  will  be  impossible;  as  to  in- 
timidation, it  is  still  less  to  be  feared.  The  necessity  of  defend- 
ing the  factories,  workshops,  manufactures,  stores,  etc.,  will 
scatter  and  disperse  the  army.  .  .  . 


THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [324 

And  then,  in  the  fear  that  the  strikes  may  damage  the  rail- 
ways, the  signals,  the  works  of  art,  the  government  will  be 
obliged  to  protect  the  39,000  kilometers  of  railroad  lines  by 
drawing  up  the  troops  all  along  them.  The  300,000  men  of 
the  active  army,  charged  with  the  surveillance  of  39  million 
meters,  will  be  isolated  from  one  another  by  130  meters,  and 
this  can  be  done  only  on  the  condition  of  abandoning  the  pro- 
tection of  the  depots,  of  the  stations,  of  the  factories,  etc.  .  .  . 
and  of  abandoning  the  employers  to  themselves,  thus  leaving 
the  field  free  in  the  large  cities  to  the  revolted  workingmen. 

rThe  principal  force  of  the  general  strike  consists  in  its  power 
of  imposing  itself.  A  strike  in  one  trade,  in  one  branch  of  in- 
dustry, must  involve  other  branches. 

The  general  strike  can  not  be  decreed  in  advance;  it  will 
burst  forth  suddenly :  a  strike  of  the  railway  men,  for  instance, 
if  declared,  will  be  the  signal  of  the  general  strike.  It  will  be 
the  duty  of  militant  workingmen,  when  this  signal  is  given,  to 
make  their  comrades  in  the  syndicats  leave  their  work.  Those 
who  continue  to  work  on  that  day  will  be  compelled,  or  forced, 
to  quit.1 

And  M.  Guerard,  applauded  by  the  audience,  con- 
cluded: "The  general  strike  will  be  the  Revolution, 
:  peaceful  or  not.'\ 

However,  as  a  concession  to  the  opponents  of  the 
general  strike,  the  Congress  of  Tours  decided  that  the 
"  Committee  for  the  propaganda  of  the  general  strike" 
should  be  independent  of  the  Confederation.  It  was  also 
from  now  on  to  collect  only  five  per  cent  of  all  strike- 
subscriptions. 

The  Congress  of  Tours  also  admonished  the  syndicats 
to  abandon  their  political  preoccupations  which  were 
held  to  be  the  cause  of  disorganization. 

These  changes  helped  but  little.     During  1896-97  the 

1  Seilhac,  Congres  Ouvriers,  pp.  331-2. 


325]      THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR  95 

Confederation  counted  n  federations,  i  federated  union, 
i  trade  union,  the  Union  of  Syndicats  of  Paris,  and  three 
national  syndicats.  The  Federation  of  Bourses  declined 
either  to  join  or  to  help  the  Confederaticm,  The  num- 
ber of  delegates  to  the  National  Council  was  again  in- 
sufficient to  constitute  the  committees.  The  income  for 
the  year,  including  the  balance  from  the  previous  year, 
amounted  to  1,558  francs.1 

The  Congress  of  Toulouse,  therefore,  decided  to  make 
new  changes.  Accepting  the  suggestion  of  the  Federa- 
tion of  Bourses  whose  adherence  was  desired,  the  Con- 
federation was  to  consist  now  of  (i)  the  Federation  of 
Bourses  du  Travail,  (2)  of  National  federations  of  trade 
and  of  industry,  and  (3)  of  local  syndicats  or  of  local 
federations  of  trades  which  were  not  yet  organized 
nationally  or  whose  national  federations  refused  to  join 
the  Confederation.  The  Confederation  was  to  be  repre- 
sented by  the  Federal  Committee  of  the  Federation  of 
Bourses  and  by  the  National  Council  of  the  Federations 
of  trade. 

The  Congress  of  Toulouse  again  declared  that  "the 
general  strike  was  synonymous  with  Revolution,"  and 
decided  that  sub-committees  for  the  propaganda  of  the 
general  strike  should  be  established  in  the  Bourses  du 
Travail  to  keep  in  touch  with  the  General  Committee 
in'  Paris.  It  discussed  several  other  questions:  trade- 
journal,  suppression  of  prison-work,  eight-hour  day,  and 
among  these,  for  the  first  time,  the  questions  of  the  boy- 
cott and  of  sabotage. 

The  report  on  boycott  and  sabotage*  was  prepared  by 
two  anarchists,  Pouget  and  Delessale.  The  report  ex- 

1  Ch.  Franck,  op.  cit.,  pp.  226-7. 

-  Sabotage  means  the  obstruction  in  all  possible  ways  of  the  regular 
process  of  production;  cf.  ch.  v. 


THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [326 

plained  the  origin  of  the  boycott  and  of  sabotage,  and 
gave  instances  of  their  application  in  different  countries. 
It  referred  in  particular  to  the  Go  Canny  practice  of  the 
English  workingmen  whose  principle  the  report  merely 
wanted  to  generalize  and  to  formulate. 

i  Up  to  the  present  time  [read  the  report]  the  workingmen  have 
declared  themselves  revolutionary ;  but  most  of  the  time  they 
have  remained  on  theoretical  ground:  they  have  labored  to 
extend  the  ideas  of  emancipation,  they  have  tried  to  sketch  a 
plan  of  a  future  society  from  which  human  exploitation  should 
be  eliminated. 

But  why,  beside  this  educational  work,  the  necessity  of  which 
is  incontestable,  has  nothing  been  tried  in  order  to  resist  the 
encroachments  of  capitalists  and  to  render  the  exigencies  of 
employers  less  painful  to  the  workingmen? 

I  To  this  end  the  report  recomended  the  use  of  the  boy- 
cott and  of  sabotage,  which  should  take  place  by  the  side 
of  the  strike  as  the  workingmen's  means  of  defense  and 
offense.  The  report  shows  how  these  methods  could  be 
used  in  particular  cases.  Sabotage  particularly,  some- 
times applied  to  the  quantity,  sometimes  to  the  quality, 
should  bring  home  to  the  employer  that  the  workingmen 
are  determined  to  render  "  poor  work  for  poor  pay  ". 
The  report  concluded : 

The  boycott  and  its  indispensable  complement,  sabotage,  fur- 
nishes us  with  an  effective  means  of  resistance  which — while 
awaiting  the  day  when  the  workingmen  will  be  sufficiently 
strong  to  emancipate  themselves  completely — will  permit  us  to 
stand  our  ground  against  the  exploitation  of  which  we  are  the 
victims. 

It  is  necessary  that  the  capitalists  should  know  it :  the 
workingman  will  respect  the  machine  only  on  that  day  when  it 
shall  have  become  for  him  a  friend  which  shortens  labor,  in- 


327]      THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR  97 

stead  of  being,  as  it  now  is,  the  enemy,  the  robber  of  bread, 
the  killer  of  workingmen.1 


The  Congress  adopted  unanimously  and  with  great  en- 
thusiasm a  motion  inviting  the  workingmen  to  apply  the 
boycott  and  sabotage  when  strikes  would  not  yield  re- 
sults. 

During  1897-98  the  Federation  of  Bourses  and  the 
Confederation  were  to  work  together,  but  no  harmony 
was  possible.  The  report  presented  to  the  Congress  of 
Rennes  (1898)  is  full  of  complaints  and  of  accusations 
on  both  sides.  Personal  difficulties  between  the  two 
secretaries,  M.  Pelloutier  and  M.  Lagailse,  who  was  an 
"  Allemanist,"  sprang  up;  besides,  the  National  Council 
and  the  Federal  Committee  were  animated  by  a  different 
spirit.  The  Federal  Committee  evidently  tried  to  domi- 
nate the  National  Council.  The  latter  was  weak.  It 
counted  only  18  organizations,  and  no  new  members 
were  gained  during  1897-98.  The  National  Council  did 
not  function  regularly  ;  the  explanation  given  was  that 
as  no  functionaries  were  paid,  they  had  but  little  time  to 
devote  to  the  business  of  the  Confederation.  The  dues 
paid  during  1897-8  amounted  to  793  francs;  the  whole 
income  was  1,702  francs.  The  treasurer  thought  that 
this  showed  that  the  "  General  Confederation  of  Labor 
was  in  a  flourishing  condition." 

The  "  Committee  for  the  propaganda  of  the  General 
Strike "  admitted  on  the  contrary  that  it  had  accom- 
plished little.  Only  twenty  Bourses  formed  sub-com- 
mittes.  The  five  per  cent  of  strike  subscriptions  was 
not  paid  by  the  syndicats.  Only  835  francs  came  in  from 
this  source ;  together  with  the  income  from  other 

1  E.  Pouget,  Le  Sabotage  (Paris,  1910),  pp.  15-16. 


0,8  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [328 

sources,  the  receipts  of  the  Committee  totaled  1,086 
francs ;  of  this  it  spent  822  francs. 

During  1898  the  Syndicat  of  Railroad  Workers  had  a 
conflict  with  the  railroad  companies  and  a  railroad  strike 
was  imminent.  The  Secretary  of  the  General  Confedera- 
tion of  Labor  sent  out  a  circular  to  all  syndical  organi- 
zations of  France  calling  their  attention  to  the  "  formi- 
dable consequences  for  capitalism  "  which  such  a  strike 
could  have,  if  joined  by  all  trades.  The  circular  formu- 
lated eight  demands,  such  as  old-age  pensions ;  eight- 
hour  day,  etc.,  which  "could  be  realized  in  a  few  days  if 
the  working-class,  conscious  of  its  force,  and  of  its 
rights,  was  willing  to  act  energetically."  l 

The  "  Committee  for  the  propaganda  of  the  general 
strike  "  also  took  up  the  question.  It  sent  out  a  ques- 
tion to  all  syndicats  for  a  referendum  vote.  The  ques- 
tion was:  "Are  you  for  an  immediate  general  strike  in 
case  the  railroad  workingmen  should  declare  a  strike?" 
The  report  of  the  Committee  to  the  Congress  of  Rennes 
complained  that  the  syndicats  voted  for  the  general 
strike  at  conventions  but  changed  their  opinions  or  their 
disposition  "when  the  hour  for  action  came."2  "  It  was 
disastrous  to  make  such  a  discovery,"  read  the  report, 

when  it  was  expected  that  by  the  strike  of  our  comrades  of 
the  railroads,  many  other  trades  would  be  compelled  by  the 
force  of  events  to  quit  work,  and  that  this  would  have  been 
the  starting-point  of  the  general  strike,  and  possibly  of  that 
economic  revolution  which  alone  can  solve  the  great  problems 
which  confront  the  entire  world.3 


1  X  Congres  National  Corporatif  (IV  de  la  C.  G.  T.),  Rennes, 
P-  77- 

2X  Conges  National  Corporatif  (Rennes,  1898),  p.  334. 
3  Ibid.,  p.  334- 


229]      THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR  99 

The  Syndicat  of  the  Railroad  Workingmen  voted  for  a 
strike.  But  the  government  intercepted  the  strike  order 
of  the  National  Committee  of  the  Syndicat,  and  the 
strike  did  not  take  place. 

Th^  Congress  of  Rennes  made  new  changes  in  the  sta- 
tutes of  the  Confederation.  The  Federation  of  Bourses 
was  to  leave  the  Confederation.  The  latter  was  to  be 
composed  only  of  national  federations  of  trade  and  of 
national  syndicats  and  to  be  represented  by  the  National 
Council.  The  "  Committee  of  the  general  strike  "  was 
to  be  part  of  the  Confederation,  but  was  to  be  auton- 
omous and  was  to  live  on  its  own  resources. 

The  Congress  discussed  a  number  of  questions  :  Alcohol- 
ism, suppression  of  employment  bureaus,  election  of  in- 
spectors of  industry,  etc.  Most  reports  on  the  various 
questions  adopted  by  the  Congress  assert  that  the  working- 
men  must  solicit  the  co-operation  of  their  representatives 
in  the  legislative  bodies  of  the  country  in  order  to  obtain 
any  reforms.  But  one  report  was  presented  which  em- 
phasized the  opposite  idea  of  "  direct  action  ". 

This  report  was  presented  by  the  "  Committee  on  the 
Label,  the  Boycott,  and  Sabotage."  The  reporter  on 
the  boycott  and  sabotage — M.  Pouget — noted  the  little 
progress  that  had  been  accomplished  in  the  application  of 
these  two  methods  since  1897,  but  again  affirmed  their 
validity  and  recommended  them  to  the  workingman  ;  the 
report  affirmed  that  the  menace,  only,  of  sabotage  is  often 
sufficient  to  produce  results.  "The  Congress,"  said  the 
report, 

cannot  enter  into  the  details  of  these  tactics;  such  things  de- 
pend upon  the  initiative  and  the  temperament  of  each  and  are 
subordinate  to  the  diversity  of  industries.  We  can  only  lay 
down  the  theory  and  express  the  wish  that  the  boycott  and 
the  sabotage  should  enter  into  the  arsenal  of  weapons  which 


I0o  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [330 

the  workingmen  use  in  their  struggle  against  capitalists  on  the 
same  plane  as  the  strike,  and  that,  more  and  more,  the  direc- 
tion of  the  social  movement  should  be  towards  the  direct 
action  of  individuals  and  towards  a  greater  consciousness  of 
their  personal  powers.1 

The  Congress  of  Paris  (1900)  again  recorded  but  little 
progress.  In  the  interval  since  Rennes  (1898-1900) 
only  a  few  new  federations  joined  the  General  Confedera- 
tion. The  others,  whose  adherence  was  solicited,  re- 
fused or  even  were  not  "  polite  enough  "  to  make  a  re- 
ply. The  adhering  organizations  paid  irregularly ;  the 
decisions  of  the  Congresses  were  not  executed.  The 
Committees  still  did  not  function  because  the  number  of 
delegates  to  the  National  Council  was  small.  The  total 
income  for  both  years  amounted  to  3,678  francs,  of 
which  1,488  were  dues  paid. 

The  "  Committee  for  the  propaganda  of  the  general 
strike"  had  collected  during  this  period  (1898-1900) 
4,262  francs.  Of  this  3,172  francs  were  the  five  per  cent 
of  the  strike  subscriptions.  It  may  also  be  interesting 
to  note  that  the  organizations  which  contributed  most 
to  this  sum  were  :  Union  of  Syndicats  of  Seine,  901  francs; 
the  Union  of  Machinists  of  Seine,  727  francs;  the  Fed- 
eration of  Moulders,  536  francs ;  the  Federation  of 
Metallurgy,  457  francs.  The  Committee  published  thir- 
teen numbers  of  a  journal,  "The  General  Strike,"  and 
a  brochure  on  the  general  strike. 

The  general  strike  was  again  the  subject  of  a  long^dis- 
cussion  at  the  Congress  of  Paris.  But  the  discussion 
was  given  a  new  turn.  The  question  now  was:  "  The 
general  strike,  its  organization,  its  eventuality,  its  conse- 
quences." And  the  ideas  that  prevailed  revealed  some 
further  modifications  in  the  conception. 

1  X  Congrcs  National  Corporaiij  (Rennes,  1898),  p.  302. 


37i]      THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR         1OI 

The  question  was  given  this  turn  because  certain  syn- 
oicats  thought  that  the  principle  of  the  general  strike 
had  been  sufficiently  affirmed  and  that  it  was  time  to 
treat  the  subject  practically.  As  the  discussion  showed, 
the  majority  of  the  delegates  thought  that  the  general 
strike  could  take  place  at  any  moment  and  that  in  order 
to  be  successful,  it  did  not  presuppose  a  majority  of 
organized  workingmen,  nor  big  sums  of  money.  A  dar- 
ing revolutionary  minority  conscious  of  its  aim  could 
carry  away  with  it  the  majority  of  workingmen  and  ac- 
complish the  act  of  appropriating  the  means  of  produc- 
tion for  society  as  a  whole.  Some  even  thought  that  in 
order  that  the  general  strike  should  be  prompt  and  lead 
to  the  aim  in  view  it  was  best  to  have  no  money  at  all; 
everyone  would  then  take  what  he  needed  wherever  he 
found  it,  and  the  result  would  be  the  completest  possible 
emancipation."1  As  one  of  the  delegates  expressed  it: 
''Qpunt  exclusively  upon  the  enthusiasm  (entrainement] 
of  the  working-class."2 

This  conception  of  the  general  strike  attributed  to  the 
syndicat  a  revolutionary  role,  as  the  syndicat  was  to  take 
possession  of  the  means  of  production  in  the  name  of 
society  as  a  whole.  It  did  not  exclude  however  the 
parallel  action  of  political  parties.  The  latter  could  profit 
by  the  general  strike  and  seize  the  political  power  of  the 
State  to  co-operate  in  the  transformation  of  society. 
But  the  syndicats  wrere  not  to  count  upon  this  possi- 
bility; on  the  contrary  it  was  their  task  to  make  the 
general  strike  absolutely  independent  of  all  political 
parties,  to  perform  the  principal  part  in  the  economic 
revolution  and  to  leave  to  the  new  government,  if  one 

1  XI  Congrcs  National  Corporatif  (Paris.  1900),  p.  198. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  113. 


I02  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [332 

arose,  no  other  function  but  that  of  sanctioning  the 
economic  change  accomplished  by  the  syndicats.  / 

This  emphasis  upon  the  revolutionary  and  preponder- 
ant part  to  be  played  by  the  syndicats  went  together 
with  a  mistrust  and  defiance  of  political  parties.  "  All 
politicians  are  betrayers,"  T  exclaimed  one  delegate.  "  In 
politics  one  has  always  to  deal  with  intrigues,"  said  an- 
other, and  the  same  sentiment  pervaded  the  other 
speeches.  Though  not  refusing  to  make  use  of  all 
methods,  "for  the  disorganization  of  capitalism,"  all 
delegates  emphasized  the  necessity  for  the  workingmen 
to  rely  mainly  upon  themselves  and  upon  their  syndical 
organizations. 

The  majority  of  delegates  recognized  also  that  the 
general  strike  must  necessarily  have  a  violent  character. 
Though  a  few  still  thought  of  the  general  strike  as  of  a 
"peaceful  revolution,"  a  "strike  of  folded  arms,"  the 
majority  rejected  this  conception  as  childish  and  foresaw 
the  inevitable  collision  to  which  the  general  strike  would 
lead. 

All  these  ideas  were  briefly  summarized  in  the  conclu- 
sions of  the  Committee  appointed  by  the  Congress  to  re- 
port on  the  question.  This  Commission  recommended 
leaving  the  "Committee  for  the  propaganda  of  the  gen- 
eral strike  "  as  free  as  possible  in  its  action.  The  Congress 
merely  determined  the  syndicats  which  were  to  elect  the 
members  of  the  Committee.  The  latter  was  now  to  obtain 
regular  monthly  dues  for  the  continuation  of  its  work. 

The  revolutionary  spirit  which  manifested  itself  in  the 
conception  of  the  general  strike  expressed  itself  also  in  the 
resolution  of  the  Congress  on  the  army.  This  resolution 
demanded  the  suppression  of  permanent  armies,  and  in- 

1  XI  Congres  National  Corporatif  (Paris,  1900),  p.  no. 


333]      THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR         103 

vited  the  syndicats  to  establish  relations  with  the  work- 
ingmen  in  military  service,  to  invite  them  to  social  gath- 
erings and  to  assist  them  financially  (to  establish  the  so- 
called  Sou  du  Soldat). 

The  same  spirit  characterized  the  report  of  the  Com- 
mittee which  formulated  the  ideas  of  the  Congress  on  the 
"  practical  means  of  realizing  the  international  harmony 
of  the  workingmen."  "  Capital,"  read  the  report,  "  in  its 
various  forms  is  international,"  and  it  is  necessary  that 
labor  should  also  be  organized  internationally.  The  slight 
differences  in  conditions  of  life  varying  from  country  to 
country  are  not  important.  "The  predominating  fact 
everywhere,  in  all  countries,  is  the  division  of  society  into 
two  categories  ;  the  producer  and  the  non-producer,  the 
wage-earner  and  the  employer."  The  report  went  on  to 
say  that  the  idea  of  "fatherland"  (patrie)  is  a  means  of 
protecting  the  strong  against  the  weak,  "  an  emblem  of 
speculation,  of  exploitation,"  "a  synonym  of  property," 
"a  fiction  for  the  workingmen  who  posesses  nothing." 
The  practical  conclusion  of  the  Committee  was  to  bring 
together  the  wage-earners  of  all  countries  in  an  interna- 
tional organization  which  should  be  represented  by  an 
international  secretariat. 

During  1900-1  the  Confederation  displayed  a  little  more 
activity  than  before.  The  National  Council  employed  a 
permanent  employee  to  attend  to  the  business  of  the  Con- 
federation, at  first  for  two,  then  for  four  hours  a  day  at 
a  remuneration  of  50  and  then  100  francs  a  month.  In 
December,  1900,  the  Confederation  began  also  to  publish 
its  own  weekly,  La  Voix  du  Peuple.  Since  1896  the 
question  of  a  trade-journal  had  been  on  the  order  of  the 
clay.  It  was  discussed  at  every  Congress  and  various 

1  A7  Congrcs  National  Corporatif  (Paris.  1900),  p.  205. 


THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [334 

plans  were  recommended  in  order  to  obtain  the  financial 
means  for  a  daily.  The  Congress  of  Paris,  in  view  of  the 
financial  impossibility  of  starting  a  daily  and  recognizing 
that  "it  was  more  than  ever  necessary  to  create  a  revo- 
lutionary syndicalist  organ,"  decided  to  publish  a  weekly. 
One  of  the  Committees  of  the  National  Council  was  to 
attend  to  it. 

The  Voix  du  Peuple,  however,  was  not  in  a  satisfac- 
tory condition  at  the  time  of  the  Congress  of  Lyons 
(1901).  Pouget,  the  editor  of  the  paper  and  the  secre- 
tary of  the  Committee  of  the  Voix  du  Peuple,  com- 
plained that  the  Voix  du  Peuple,  "  suffered  from  the 
apathy  and  the  negligence  of  the  comrades."  Only  260 
syndicats  subscribed  for  the  paper  (out  of  2,700  syndi- 
cats  then  in  existence).  In  Paris  only  600  copies  were 
sold  weekly.  The  finances  showed  a  deficit  for  the  year 
of  over  6,000  francs.  The  number  of  copies  printed  fell 
from  12,000-14,000  during  the  first  months  to  800  dur- 
ing the  later  months. 

The  secretary  of  the  Confederation,  M.  Guerard,  also 
complained  that  the  "  Confederation  was  anaemic  for  lack 
of  meansT^  The  twenty  organizations — federations  and 
syndicats — which  adhered  to  the  Confederation  during 
1900-1901  paid  in  1,478  francs.  The  total  income  was 
4,125  francs.  With  such  limited  means  the  Confedera- 
tion could  do  nothing.  The  Congress  of  Lyons  (1901) 
— where  all  these  reports  were  read — was  provided  for 
by  a  subvention  from  the  municipality  of  Lyons  which 
appropriated  7,000  francs  for  the  purpose. 

The  Congress  of  Lyons,  nevertheless,  showed  that  the 
Confederation  was  beginning  to  feel  a  little  more  confi- 
dence in  its  future.  The  Congress  decided  that  hence- 
forth only  syndicats  adhering  to  the  Confederation 
should  take  part  in  its  Congresses.  Previous  to  that  all 


335]      THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR         105 

syndicats  were  invited  to  send  a  delegate  or  their  man- 
date to  the  Congresses  of  the  Confederation.  The  Con- 
gresses, therefore,  neither  revealed  the  strength  of  the 
Confederation,  nor  had  a  binding  character,  and  were 
significant  merely  as  revealing  the  state  of  mind  of  a 
large  part  of  the  organized  workingmen  of  the  time. 
The  decision  of  the  Congress  of  Lyons  was  to  do  away 
with  this  condition  and  to  give  the  Congresses  of  the 
Confederation  a  more  coherent  and  binding  character. 

Another  decision  taken  by  the  Congress  of  Lyons  was 
to  admit  local  and  regional  federations  of  syndicats. 
This  was  directed  against  the  Federation  of  Bourses. 
Though  more  friendly  since  1900,  the  relations  between 
the  two  organizations  still  gave  trouble.  The  question 
of  unity,  however,  was  urged  by  many  workingmen,  and 
the  Congress  decided  to  call  a  special  Congress  for  1902 
to  solve  this  problem. 

The  Congress  of  Lyons  revealed  the  further  progress 
of  revolutionary  ideas  among  the  delegates.  There  were 
226  delegates;  these  represented  26  Bourses  and  8  local 
federations,  comprising  1,035  syndicats  with  245,000 
members; '  eight  regional  federations  composed  of  264 
syndicats  with  36,000  members;  8  federations  of  trade  or 
industry  counting  507  syndicats  with  196,000  members; 
492  syndicats  with  60,000  workingmen  were  represented 
directly.  The  exact  number  of  syndicats  and  of  work- 

1  The  growth  of  syndicats  in  France  since  1895  is  shown  in  the  fol- 
lowing table : 

Year                            Syndicats  Members 

1895  2,163  419.781 

1896 2,243  4^2,777 

1898  2,324  437,79.1 

1899  2,361  419,761 

1900  2,685  492,647 

1901  3,287  588,832 


I06  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [336 

ingmen  represented  cannot  be  obtained  from  these  fig- 
ures, because  one  syndicat  could  be  represented  several 
times  in  a  local  federation,  in  a  Bourse,  and  in  the  fed- 
eration of  trade.  The  delegates,  however,  came  from 
different  parts  of  the  country  and  were  numerous  enough 
to  show  that  the  ideas  they  expressed  were  accepted  by 
a  considerable  number  of  French  workingmen. 

{Of  the  questions  discussed  at  Lyons  three  had  a  par- 
ticular significance  as  showing  the  revolutionary  ten- 
dency which  the  Confederation  was  taking.  These  were 
the  questions  of  the  general  strike,  of  labor-laws,  and  of 
the  relations  to  the  political  parties. 

The  "  Committee  for  the  propaganda  of  the  General 
Strike  "  reported  more  activity  for  the  year  1900-1  and 
greater  success  in  its  work.  The  Committee  published 
a  brochure  on  the  General  Strike  of  which  50,000  copies 
were  distributed.  It  collected  over  1,500  francs  in 
monthly  dues,  and  its  total  income  amounted  to  2,447 
francs.  It  was  in  touch  with  a  number  of  sub-com- 
mittees in  the  different  Bourses  du  Travail,  arranged  a 
number  of  meetings  on  various  occasions,  and  lent  its 
support  to  some  strikes.  The  Committee  affirmed  that 
the  idea  of  the  general  strike  had  spread  widely  during 
the  year  and  attributed  this  fact  to  the  big  strikes  which 
had  taken  place  in  France  after  the  International  Ex- 
hibition of  1900  and  which  had  thrown  the  workingmen 
into  a  state  of  agitation.  . 

At  the  time  the  Congress  of  Lyons  was  being  held, 
the  miners  were  threatening  to  strike,  if  their  demands 
were  not  granted  by  the  companies.  The  delegate  of 
the  miners  was  at  the  Congress,  and  the  discussion  that 
took  place  under  these  conditions  was  very  character- 
istic. 

The  Committee  on  the  general  strike  which  consisted 
of  fifteen  members  reported  : 


337]      THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR         107 

The  idea  of  the  general  strike  is  sufficiently  understood  to-day. 
In  repeatedly  putting  off  the  date  of  its  coming,  we  risk  dis- 
crediting it  forever  by  enervating  the  revolutionary  energies. 

What  better  occasion  to  realize  it ! 

The  miners  will  give  the  signal  on  the  first  of  November ; 
the  working-class — in  case  of  a  revolution — counts  upon  this 
movement  which  must  bring  them  their  economic  liberation. 

And  the  report  of  the  Committee  went  on  to  point 
out  the  conditions  which  in  its  opinion  indicated  "that 
the  moment  had  come  to  try  the  general  strike  (faire  la 
Greve  genkrale)  with  strong  chances  of  success."1 

^The  delegate  from  the  miners  said:  "  If  you  wish  to 
join  us,  we  will  be  able  not  only  to  strike,  but  to  bring 
about  the  revolution;  if  we  were  made  sure  of  the  co- 
operation of  all  trades,  even  if  it  were  necessary  to  wait 
for  it  two,  three,  or  even  six  months,  we  are  ready  to 
grant  you  this  concession."2 

The  following  motion  was  then  adopted: 

The  Congress  declares  that  the  General  Strike  cannot  be  the 
means  merely  of  obtaining  amelioration  for  any  category  of 
workingmen. 

Its  aim  can  be  only  the  complete  emancipation  of  the  pro- 
letariat through  the  violent  expropriation  of  the  capitalist  class. 

The  Congress,  in  view  of  the  situation,  declares  that  the 
movement  which  may  take  place  in  favor  of  the  miners,  the 
importance  or  character  of  which  nobody  can  foresee  and 
which  may  go  to  the  point  of  a  general  emancipation,  will  be 
in  any  case  a  movement  of  solidarity  which  will  not  impair  in 
the  least  the  revolutionary  principle  of  the  general  strike  of 
all  workingmen.8  ) 

The  delegate  of  the  Typographical  Union  (La  F&d&ra- 

1  XII  Congrcs  National  Corfioratif  (Lyons,  1901),  p.  170. 

2  Ibid.,  pp.  1/7-8.  *  Ibid.,  p.  179. 


I08  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [338 

tion  du  Livre}  combated  the  idea  of  the  general  strike 
and  argued  that  it  was  impossible  in  view  of  the  small 
number  of  organized  workingmen.  But  his  argument 
had  no  effect  on  the  Congress.  It  was  rejected  as  of  no 
importance  because  the  minority  of  organized  working- 
men  could  carry  away  with  it  the  majority. 

The  question  of  labor  laws  was  the  subject  of  an  ani- 
mated discussion  at  the  Congress  because  of  its  im- 
portance. The  answer  given  to  this  question  was  to 
determine  the  attitude  of  the  General  Confederation  to 
legislative  reforms  and  to  the  State  in  general. 

The  question  was  a  very  practical  one.  The  govern- 
ment of  Waldeck-Rousseau  (22  June,  1899-6  June, 
1902),  in  which  the  socialist,  Millerand,  was  Minister  of 
Commerce  and  Industry,  outlined  a  number  of  labor 
laws  which  touched  upon  the  most  vital  questions  of  the 
labor  movement.  The  most  important  of  these  law- 
projects  were  on  strikes  and  arbitration,  on  the  compo- 
sition of  the  superior  Council  of  Labor,  on  the  institu- 
tion of  Councils  of  Labor,  and  on  the  modification  of 
the  law  of  1884. 

The  policy  of  the  government  in  planning  these  laws 
was  clear  and  expressly  stated.  It  was  the  continuation 
and  accentuation  of  the  policy  which  had  guided  M. 
Waldeck-Rousseau  in  1884  when  he  was  Minister  of  the 
Interior  in  the  Cabinet  of  Jules  Ferry,  and  which  had 
then  found  partial  expression  in  the  ministerial  circular 
on  the  application  of  the  new  law  on  syndicats. 

This  "  Circular,"  sent  out  to  the  Prefects  August  25, 
1884,  pointed  out  to  the  Prefects  that  it  was  the  duty  of 
the  State  not  merely  to  watch  over  the  strict  observa- 
tion of  the  law,  but  "to  favor  the  spirit  of  association  " 
among  the  workingmen  and  "  to  stimulate  "  the  latter  to 
make  use  of  the  new  right.  In  the  conception  of  the 


339]      THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OP  LABOR 

government  the  syndicats  were  to  be  "  less  a  weapon  of 
struggle"  than  "an  instrument  of  material,  moral  and 
intellectual  progress."  It  was  "the  wish  of  the  Govern- 
ment and  of  the  Chambers  to  see  the  propagation,  in  the 
largest  possible  measure,  of  the  trade  associations  and  of 
the  institutions  which  they  were  destined  to  engender  " 
(such  as  old-age  pension  funds,  mutual  credit  banks, 
libraries,  co-operative  societies,  etc.)  and  the  govern- 
ment expected  the  Prefects  ''  to  lend  active  assistance" 
in  the  organization  of  syndicats  and  in  the  creation  of 
syndical  institutions.1 

The  aim  of  Waldeck-Rousseau  was  to  bring  about  the 
"alliance  of  the  bourgeoise  and  of  the  working-class"2 
which  Gambetta  and  other  republican  statesmen  had  un- 
tiringly preached  as  the  only  condition  of  maintaining 
the  Republic.  )  In  the  period  1899-1902  this  policy 
seemed  still  more  indispensable.  It  was  the  time  when 
the  agitation  caused  by  the  Dreyfus  affair  assumed  the 
character  of  a  struggle  between  the  republican  and  anti- 
republican  forces  of  France.  Republicans,  Radicals, 
Socialists,  and  Anarchists  were  fighting  hand  in  hand 
against  Monarchists,  Nationalists,  Anti-Semites  and 
Clericals.  The  cabinet  of  Waldeck-Rousseau  constituted 
itself  a  "Cabinet  of  Republican  Defense"  and  it  sought 
to  attain  its  end  by  securing  the  support  of  all  repub- 
lican elements  of  the  country.  This  was  the  cause  which 
prompted  Waldeck-Rousseau  to  invite  a  socialist,  Mil- 
lerand,  to  enter  his  cabinet  and  to  accentuate  his  policy 
of  attaching  the  working-class  to  the  Republic  by  a 
series  of  protective  labor  laws. 

1  Sec  the  "Circulaire"  in  G.  Severac.  (inide  rnilicinc  tics  Syndicats 
Professionncls  (Paris,  1908),  pp.  125-136. 

-  G.  Hanoteaux,  Modern  l:rance  ( tr.  by  J.  C.  Tarver,  New  York, 
1903-09),  vol.  ii,  p.  181. 


IIO  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [340 

The  policy  of  the  Government  was  clearly  expressed 
by  Millerand  in  the  Chamber  of  Deputies  on  November 
23,  1899.  "It  has  appeared  to  me,"  said  he,  "that  the 
best  means  for  bringing  back  the  working  masses  to  the 
Republic,  is  to  show  them  not  by  words,  but  by  facts, 
that  the  republican  government  is  above  everything  else 
the  government  of  the  small  and  of  the  weak." ' 

The  facts  by  which  M.  Millerand  undertook  to  show 
this  were  a  number  of  decrees  by  which  the  government 
tried  to  enforce  a  stricter  observation  of  labor-laws 
already  in  existence  and  a  series  of  new  law-projects  for 
the  future  protection  of  labor,  such  as  the  bill  on  a  ten- 
hour  day,  which  became  law  on  March  30,  1900.  As 
M.  Millerand  expressed  it,  this  law  was  "  a  measure  of 
moralization,  of  solidarity,  and  of  social  pacification." 

Social  pacification  was  the  supreme  aim  of  M^-Miller- 
and  and  of  the  government.  M.  Millerand  hoped  to 
attain  this  by  calling  workingmen  to  participation  in  the 
legislative  activities  of  the  Republic,  by  accustoming 
them  to  peaceable  discussions  with  employers,  and  by- 
regulating  the  more  violent  forms  of  the  economic 
struggle. 

A  decree  from  September  i,  1899,  modified  the  con- 
stitution of  the  Superior  Council  of  Labor,  in  existence 
since  1891,  so  that  it  should  henceforth  consist  of  22 
elected  workingmen,  22  elected  employers  and  22  mem- 
bers appointed  by  the  Minister  from  among  the  deputies 
of  the  Chamber,  the  senators  and  other  persons  repre- 
senting "  general  interests."  The  Superior  Council  of 
Labor  was  "  an  instrument  of  study,  of  information  and 
of  consultation "  in  matters  of  labor  legislation.  It 
studied  law-projects  affecting  the  conditions  of  labor, 

1  A.  Lavy,  L'Oeuvre  de  Millerand  (Paris,  1902),  p.  2. 


341  ] 


THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR 


made  its  own  suggestions  to  the  government,  but  had 
no  legislative  powers. 

The  decree  of  M.  Millerand  was  particularly  significant 
in  one  respect  :  it  called  upon  the  workingmen  organized 
in  the  syndicats  to  elect  fifteen  members  of  the  Superior 
Council  of  Labor.  M.  Millerand  pointed  out  the  sig- 
nificance of  this  measure  in  a  speech  delivered  on  June 
5,  1900.  Said  he  : 

The  workingmen  are  henceforth  warned,  that  in  order  to 
participate  through  delegates  sprung  from  their  own  ranks 
in  the  elaboration  of  economic  reforms  which  concern 
them  most,  it  is  necessary  and  sufficient  that  they  enter 
the  ranks  of  that  great  army  of  which  the  syndicats  are  the 
battalions.  How  can  they  refuse  to  do  this?  By  inducing 
them  to  do  so  we  believe  that  we  are  defending  their  legitimate 
interests  at  the  same  time  that  we  are  serving  the  cause  of 
social  peace  in  this  country.1 

The  "Councils  of  Labor"  were  organized  by  two  de- 
crees from  September  17,  1900,  and  from  January  2, 
1901.  Composed  of  an  equal  number  of  workingmen 
and  of  employers,  these  Councils  had  for  their  principal 
mission  to  enlighten  the  government,  as  well  as  work- 
ingmen and  employers,  on  the  actual  and  necessary  con- 
ditions of  labor,  to  facilitate  thereby  industrial  harmony 
and  general  agreement  between  the  interested  parties, 
to  furnish  in  cases  of  collective  conflicts  competent 
mediators,  and  to  inform  the  public  authorities  on  the 
effects  produced  by  labor  legislation.1 

M.  Millerand  emphasized  that  the  Councils  of  Labor 
were  to  bring  workingmen  and  employers  together  for 
the  discussion  of  "their  general  interests"  and  that  this 

1  A.  Lavy,  op.  cit.,  p.  66.  *  Ibid.,  p.  79. 


112  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [342 

new  institution  would  be  one  more  motive  for  the  utili- 
zation of  the  law  of  1884  on  syndicats.  "To  encourage 
by  all  means  the  formation  of  these  trade-associations, 
so  useful  for  the  progress  of  social  peace,"  wrote  the 
Minister  in  his  decree,  "  is  a  task  which  a  republican 
government  cannot  neglect.'/ 

To  enlarge  the  possible  operations  of  the  syndicats, 
the  government  also  introduced  a  bill  into  the  Chamber 
(November  14,  1899)  which  contained  several  modifica- 
tions of  the  law  of  1884.  This  bill  proposed  to  extend 
the  commercial  capacities  of  the  syndicat  and  to  grant 
the  syndicat  the  rights  of  a  juridical  person. 

To  complete  the  series  of  measures  which  were  to  im- 
part a  peaceful  character  to  the  syndical  movement,  M. 
Millerand  introduced  into  the  chamber  a  bill  (November 
,  15,  1900)  on  the  regulation  of  strikes  and  on  arbitration. 
This  law-project  proposed  a  complicated  mechanism  for 
the  settlement  of  economic  conflicts.  It  hinged  on  the 
principle  that  strikes  should  be  decided  by  secret  ballot 
and  by  a  majority  vote  renewed  at  brief  intervals  by  all 
workingmen  concerned  ;  permanent  arbitration  boards 
in  the  industrial  establishments  were  part  of  the  mech- 
anism.2 

Toward  this  series  of  labor  laws  the  Congress  of 
Lyons  was  to  define  its  attitude.  The  principle  of  the 
Superior  Council  of  Labor  was  accepted  by  a  majority  of 
258  against  205  votes  (5  blank);  the  project  on  the 
regulation  of  strikes  and  on  arbitration  was  rejected  by 
a  unanimous  vote  minus  five;  the  Councils  of  Labor 
proposition  was  rejected  by  a  majority  of  279  against 
175  (18  blank). 

1  A.  Lavy,  op.  cit.t  p.  80. 

3  Only  the  most  important  measures  of  M.  Millerand  are  mentioned; 
they  do  not  by  any  means  exhaust  his  legislative  activities  during  this 
period. 


343  ] 


THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR 


The  discussion  on  the  labor  laws  brought  out  the  fact 
that  the  idea  of  "  direct  action  "  had  undergone  further 
modifications  as  a  result  of  the  policy  of  the  government. 
M.  Waldeck-Rousseau  was  denounced  by  the  speakers  as 
"  a  clever  defender  of  the  interests  of  the  bourgeoisie" 
who  wished  merely  to  stop  the  offensive  movement  o£  the 
workingmen  ".  T  The  legislative  measures  of  the  "  pseudo- 
socialist  minister  ",2  Millerand,  were  interpreted  as  schemes 
for  restraining  the  revolutionary  action  of  the  syndicats.  3 
The  workingmen  were  warned  that,  if  they  accepted  the 
laws,  they  would  "  reinforce  a  power  which  they  wanted  to 
destroy".  4  They  were  reminded  that  the  main  function  of 
the  syndicat  was  to  organize  the  workmen  for  their  final 
emancipation  which  presupposes  the  "abolition  of  the 
wage-system"  and  that  all  "  so-called  lat}or  laws  "  would 
only  retard  the  hour  of  final  liberation.  / 

The  revolutionary  elements  of  the  Congress  did  not 
deny,  however,  the  possibility  or  the  desirability  of  reforms. 
They  insisted  only  upon  particular  methods  of  obtaining 
reforms  and  upon  a  particular  kind  of  reforms.  They  rejec- 
ted all  peaceful  discussion  with  employers  because  the  inter- 
ests of  employers  and  of  workingmen  were  held  to  be  dis- 
tinct and  antagonistic.  They  did  not  want  an  "  economic 
parliamentarism  "5  which  would  necessarily  take  the  sting 
out  of  the  workingmen's  weapons  and  deprive  the  syndicats 
of  their  force.  They  wanted  such  reforms  only  as  should 
"undermine  the  foundations"6  of  existing  society  and 
which  should  advance  the  movement  for  "  integral  emanci- 

1  XII  Congrcs  National  Corporatif  (VI  tie  la  C.  G.  T.),  Lyons,  1901, 
p.  i  10. 

-Ibid.,  p.  114.  3  Ibid.,  p.  210. 

4  Ibid.,  p.  112.  5  Ibid.,  p.  218. 

6  Ibid.,  p.  no. 


THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [344 

pation  "  by  strengthening  the  forces  and  the  organization 
of  the  workingmen. 

Such  reforms  could  be  obtained  only  independently  of 
all  parliamentarism  "/  by  the  workingmen  organized  in 
their  syndicats  displaying  all  their  initiative,  manifest- 
ing all  their  energies,  relying  only  upon  themselves  and 
not  upon  intermediaries.  Only  in  this  way  would  the  syn- 
dicats wrest  "  piece  by  piece  from  capitalistic  society  re- 
forms the  application  of  which  would  finally  give  the  ex- 
ploited class  the  force  which  is  indispensable  in  order  to 
bring  about  the  social  revolution  ". 2 

These  ideas  showed  the  further  application  which  the 
principle  of  "direct  action"  was  given  by  the  revolution- 
ary elements  in  the  syndicats.  The  syndicats  were  not 
only  to  carry  on  their  struggle  "  directly"  against  employ- 
ers by  strikes,  boycotts  and  sabotage,  but  also  against  the 
State,  and  not  only  against  the  State  appearing  as  the 
"enemy  of  labor",  but  also  against  the  State  wishing  to 
become  the  protector  and  benefactor  of  the  workingmen. 
This  hostility  to  the  State  and  to  its  reform-legislation 
marked  a  further  accentuation  of  the  ideas  of  revolu- 
tionary syndicalism.) 

The  Congress  of  Lyons  took,  also,  a  decided  stand  on 
the  relations  of  the  syndicats  to  political  action.  Under 
"political  action"  of  course  the  action  of  the  Socialist 
parties  was  meant.  After  the  foundation  of  the  General 
Confederation  of  Labor  certain  important  changes  had 
taken  place  in  the  socialist  movement  of  France  which 
could  not  but  have  their  effect  upon  the  syndicats. 

In  1893  the  socialist  parties  had  their  first  big  success 
in  the  general  elections.  They  obtained  about  600,000 

1  XI  Congrcs  National  Corporatif,  p.  114. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  119. 


345] 


THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR 


votes  '  and  elected  over  50  deputies.  The  socialist  dep- 
uties in  the  Chamber  constituted  a  Parliamentary  Group 
—  Union  Socialiste  —  which  acted  in  common.  This 
strengthened  the  tendency  toward  union  which  had 
already  manifested  itself,  during  the  elections,  when  the 
Socialists  had  entered  into  unions  among  themselves. 

The  unity  in  action  was  further  made  possible  by  a 
unity  in  views  which  was  becoming  more  and  more  man- 
ifest. After  1892,  when  the  Guesdists  obtained  a  large 
number  of  votes  in  the  municipal  elections  and  gained  a 
number  of  municipalities,  their  ideas  on  some  of  the 
most  important  points  of  their  program  began  to 
change.  In  1894,  at  their  Congress  of  Nantes,  the 
Guesdists  elaborated  a  detailed  program  of  reforms  de- 
signed to  win  the  votes  of  the  agricultural  population. 
This  program  made  no  mention  of  the  collective  appro- 
priation of  the  soil  ;  on  the  contrary,  it  stated  that,  "  in 
the  agricultural  domain,  the  means  of  production,  which 
is  the  soil,  is  in  many  places  still  in  the  possession  of  the 
producers  themselves  as  individual  property"  and  that 
"  if  this  state  of  conditions,  characterized  by  peasant 
proprietorship,  must  inevitably  disappear,  socialism  must 
not  precipitate  its  disappearance."  With  similar  prom- 
ises of  reform  the  Guesdists  addressed  other  classes  of 
the  population  :  artisans,  small  merchants  and  the  lower 
strata  of  the  middle  classes. 

Formerly  ardent  revolutionists,  they  now  began  to 
emphasize  the  legal  aspect  of  their  activity  and  the 
emancipating  influence  of  universal  suffrage.  Jules 
Guesde  himself  in  his  speeches  in  the  Chamber  of  Dep- 

1  A.  Hamon,  Lc  SociaHsine  ct  !e  Congrcs  dc  Londrcs   (Paris,  1897), 
p.  ii. 

2  L.  Blum,  Cor.grcs  Curriers  ct  Socialistcs.  p.  146. 


THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [346 

uties  on  various  occasions  expressed  his  belief  that  uni- 
versal suffrage  was  the  instrument  with  which  all  ques- 
tions might  be  peacefully  solved,1  and  that  nothing  but 
legal  weapons  would  throw  the  Republic  into  the  hands 
of  the  socialist  army.  G.  Deville,  then  one  of  the  prin- 
cipal theorists  of  the  party,  affirmed  in  1896  that  the 
only  actual  task  of  the  party  was  to  increase  the  number 
of  socialist  electors  and  representatives.2  With  the 
affirmation  of  the  emancipating  significance  of  universal 
suffrage  the  importance  of  parliamentary  action  was 
more  and  more  emphasized. 

Thus  the  "revolutionary"  socialists  were  approach- 
ing the  reformist  elements  composed  of  Broussists  and 
of  Independents.  In  1896  this  rapprochement  was  mani- 
fested at  the  banquet  of  Saint  Mande  arranged  on  the 
occasion  of  the  success  obtained  by  the  socialists  during 
the  municipal  elections  of  that  year.  All  socialist  parties 
took  part  in  it  and  Millerand  delivered  a  speech  in 
which  he  outlined  the  common  points  of  the  socialist 
program.  This  program  emphasized  the  peaceful  and 
evolutionary  character  of  socialism:  "We  address  our- 
selves only  to  universal  suffrage,"  said  Millerand,  .  .  . 
"  In  order  to  begin  the  socialization  of  the  means  of 
production,  it  is  necessary  and  sufficient  for  the  Socialist 
party  to  pursue  with  the  help  of  universal  suffrage  the 
conquest  of  the  political  powers."3  Guesde,  present  at 
the  banquet,  approved  and  "applauded"  the  definition 
of  Socialism  given  by  Millerand. 

The    Dreyfus    affair   brought   the   socialists   for   some 

1  Chambre  des  Deputes,  Debats  Parlementaires;  July  n,  1895;  No- 
vember 22,  1895. 

2  Deville,  Principes  Socialistes. 

3  A.   Millerand,   Le   Socialisme   Reformiste   Franqai-s    (Paris,    1903), 
pp.  31-32. 


247] 


T1IE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR 


time  into  still  closer  contact.  A  "  Committee  of  Har- 
mony "  (Coniite  d'  Entente]  was  formed  in  which  all  the 
socialist  organizations  were  represented.  The  demand 
for  unity  was  expressed  in  the  socialist  periodical  press, 
and  J.  Jaures  outlined  a  plan  according  to  which  the  old 
separate  and  rival  factions  were  to  disappear  in  one  uni- 
fied party.1  The  belief  in  the  possibility  of  such  a  unified 
party  was  general. 

The  entrance  of  Millerand  into  the  Ministry  of  Wal- 
deck-Rousseau  was  a  sudden  shock  which  again  dis- 
rupted the  elements  tending  toward  union.  The  Gues- 
dists,  Blanquists  and  a  few  other  groups  denounced  the 
act  of  Millerand  as  a  violation  of  the  principles  of  class 
and  class-struggle  —  the  fundamental  principles  of  Social- 
ism. The  Independents,  Broussists  and  similar  elements, 
on  the  contrary,  insisted  upon  the  necessity  of  taking 
part  in  the  general  life  of  the  country  and  of  assuming 
responsibilities  when  they  are  inevitable.  At  two  gen- 
eral Congresses  of  all  socialist  organizations  held  in 
Paris  (December,  1899,  and  September,  1900)  this  ques- 
tion was  discussed.  The  Congresses  ended  with  a  quar- 
rel among  the  various  socialist  organizations  which  led 
to  complete  rupture  at  the  following  Congress  in  Lyons 
in  May,  1901.  The  Guesdists,  Blanquists  and  several 
regional  federations  formed  the  Parti  Socialists  de 
France;  the  Independents,  Broussists,  and  Allemanists 
formed  the  Parti  Socialistc  Francais,  which  supported 
Millerand  and  the  cabinet  of  Waldeck-Rousseau.  Within 
each  new  grouping,  however,  the  old  organizations  re- 
mained intact. 

The  "  case  Millerand  "  raised  such  violent  polemics, 
such  bitter  mutual  accusations  among  the  Socialists  that 

1  Le  Mouvement  Socialiste,  Jan.,  1899. 


ug  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [348 

many  members  of  the  party  felt  disgusted.  Even  the 
French  socialist  movement,  so  rich  in  inner  divisions 
and  dissensions,  had  never  before  experienced  such  a 
critical  condition. 

\  In  view  of  this  situation  the  organized  workingmen 
were  anxious  now  more  than  ever  to  keep  politics  out  of 
the  syndicats.  The  resolution  adopted  unanimously  by 
the  Congress  of  Lyons  insisted  upon  the  fact  that  the 
introduction  of  politics  into  the  syndicats  would  cause 
division  in  the  syndicalist  ranks,  and  therefore  invited 
the  syndicats  and  the  federations  to  remain  independent 
of  all  political  parties,  "  leaving  to  individuals  the  unde- 
niable right  to  devote  themselves  to  that  kind  of  struggle 
which  they  prefer  in  the  political  field."  The  syndicat 
as  an  organization,  however,  should  remain  neutral; 
otherwise  it  would  be  "false  to  its  true  role  which  con- 
sists in  grouping  all  the  exploited  without  distinction  of 
race,  nationality,  philosophical  or  religious  opinions,  and 
political  views."  I 

The  reaction  of  socialist  workingmen,  however,  to  the 
situation  created  by  the  "  case  Millerand  "  was  of  a  more 
complicated  character.  While  the  entrance  of  a  socialist 
minister  into  the  government  aroused  hopes  and  ex- 
pectations in  the  minds  of  many,  to  others  it  seemed  the 
beginning  of  the  end  of  socialism.  Habitually  regarding 
socialism  as  a  class-movement,  imbued  with  the  ideas  of 
class  and  class-struggle,  they  were  shocked  and  grieved 
at  the  "collaboration  of  classes"  which  Millerand 


tised  in  the  government  and  the  Socialists  in  Parliament./ 
To  these  socialist  workingmen  the  danger  seemed  the 
greater  because  it  presented  itself  as  a  crowning  act  of  a 
policy  that  had  been  pursued  for  some  time  by  all   the 

1  XII  Congrcs  Corporatif  (Lyons,  1901),  p.  151. 


3491      THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR         119 

socialists.  As  we  have  seen,  even  the  revolutionary 
Guesdists  had  become  more  and  more  moderate.  They 
had  co-operated  in  Parliament  with  the  republican  parties 
and  had  concluded  alliances  during  elections  with  "  bour- 
geois "  parties.  At  the  general  Congress  of  socialists  in 
Paris  in  1899,  M.  Briand  in  a  clever  and  somewhat  biting 
speech  pointed  out  to  the  revolutionary  socialists  that 
their  policy  had  made  the  "case  Millerand "  possible. 
"It  seems,"  said  Briand,  "that  great  astonishment  has 
been  aroused  in  our  comrades  of  the  Parti  Ouvrier 
(Guesdists)  by  the  entrance  of  our  comrade  Millerand 
into  a  bourgeois  government.  But,  citizens  of  the  Parti 
Ouvrier,  what  has  taken  place  is  the  very  consequence 
of  the  policy  which  by  successive  concessions  you  have 
forced  upon  the  entire  socialist  party." r  And  Briand 
pointed  out  these  "  successive  concessions"  which  de- 
prived the  Guesdists  of  their  revolutionary  character. 
To  quote  M.  Briand  again  : 

Yes,  you  become  interested  in  these  [electoral]  struggles  which 
gave  immediate  results,  and  little  by  little  our  militant  com- 
rades also  became  interested  in  them,  took  a  liking  for  them 
to  such  a  degree  that  they  soon  came  to  believe  that  in  order 
to  triumph  definitely  over  the  capitalist  society  nothing  was 
necessary  but  to  storm  the  ballot-boxes.  Thus  within  recent 
years  the  country  could  gain  the  impression  that  the  socialist 
party  was  no  longer  a  revolutionary  party.2 

This  impression  many  socialist  workingmen  had,  and 
the  "case  Millerand"  strengthened  it  in  them.  But 
preservation  of  the  revolutionary  character  of  socialism 
was  for  them  a  necessity,  equivalent  to  maintaining  their 
belief  in  the  coming  of  socialism  at  all.  These  working- 

1  Congrcs  General  dcs  Organisations  Socialistes  (Paris,  1899),  p.  152. 
-  Ibid.,  p.  155. 


120  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [350 

men  of  all  socialist  parties,  Allemanists,  Blanquists,  and 
even  Guesdists,  therefore,  now  threw  themselves  with 
greater  energy  into  the  syndicalist  movement  which 
seemed  to  them  the  only  refuge  for  the  revolutionary 
spirit.  ^There  they  met  the  Communist-Anarchists  who 
had  been  taking  an  active  part  in  the  syndicalist  move- 
ment for  some  time.  The  Communist-Anarchists  before 
1895  had  generally  shown  little  sympathy  for  the  syndi- 
cats  where  the  workingmen,  they  said,  were  either  en- 
gaged in  politics  or  trying  to  obtain  paltry  reforms. 
But  tired  of  carrying  on  a  merely  verbal  propaganda  and 
spurred  on  by  Pelloutier,1  they  began  to  change  their 
attitude  after  1895,  and  after  1899  became  influential  in 
many  syndicalist  organizations.  Their  criticism  of  elect- 
oral action,  their  denunciation  of  political  intriguing, 
now  under  the  conditions  created  by  the  "  case  Miller- 
and,"  fell  on  prepared  ground  and  yielded  fruit.  A 
decided  anti-political  tendency  gained  strength  in  the 
syndicats. 

This  tendency  was  further  strengthened  by  the  economic 
events  of  the  period.  During  these  years,  particularly  after 
the  Exhibition  of  Paris,  a  series  of  big  strikes  took  place 
in  various  parts  of  France,  among  the  miners  in  the  north, 
the  dockers  in  the  ports  of  the  south,  in  the  Creusot  works, 
etc.  These  strikes  were  partly  the  result  of  the  large  ex- 
pectations aroused  in  the  workingmen  by  the  entrance  of  a 
socialist  minister  into  the  government.  But  the  govern- 
ment sent  troops  against  some  of  the  strikers  and  in  two 
or  three  cases  blood  was  shed.  The  agitation  aroused  by 
the  bloodshed  was  great  and  intensified  the  defiance  toward 

1  To  understand  the  change  in  the  attitude  of  the  anarchists  towards 
the  syndicats,  the  disillusioning  effect  of  their  terroristic  campaign 
from  1890  to  1894,  during  which  the  exploits  of  Ravachole,  Henri, 
Casiers,  and  others  took  place,  must  also  be  considered. 


35 1  ]   THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR    I2i 

Millerand  and  toward  the  political  parties  in  general. 
On  the  other  hand,  some  of  the  strikes  became  more  or 
less  general  in  character  and  were  won  by  the  energetic 
action  of  the  strikers.  This  strengthened  the  conviction 
in  the  efficacy  of  economic  action  and  in  the  possibility  of 
the  general  strike. 

Under  the  combined  influence  of  all  these  conditions,  the 
socialist  and  anarchist  workingmen,  during  this  period, 
began  to  ascribe  to  thesyndicats  a  decided  preponderance 
in  all  respects,  and  they  actively  engaged  in  making  their 
revolutionary  ideas  predominant  in  the  syndical  organiza- 
tions. The  resolutions  and  discussions  at  the  Congress 
of  Lyons  revealed  this  state  of  mind  and  the  progress  at- 
tained. The  revolutionary  elements  of  the  syndicats  had 
by  this  time  become  conscious  of  themselves,  and  in  op- 
position to  the  program  of  the  political  socialists,  they 
advanced  the  idea  of  the  General  Confederation  of  Labor 
as  a  distinctly  unifying  conception  which  in  the  future 
was  to  play  a  great  social  role.  "The  General  Confeder- 
ation of  Labor  uniting  all  the  workingmen's  syndical 
forces,"  said  the  Secretary,  Guerard,  in  his  report  to  the 
Congress  of  Lyons,  "  is  destined  to  become  the  revolu- 
tionary instrument  capable  of  transforming  society.  " z 
In  greeting  the  delegates  at  the  opening  of  the  Congress, 
Bourchet  addressed  them  as  "  the  representatives  of  the 
great  party  of  Labor"  (grand  parti  du  travail]  .*  The 
same  term  was  used  by  other  delegates,3  and  in  the  sum- 
ming-up of  the  work  of  the  Congress,  the  emphasis  was 
laid  upon  the  demarcation  between  the  syndicalists  and 
the  politicians  which  the  Congress  had  clearly  shown. 

'•Thus,  with  the  Congress  of  Lyons  the  General  Con- 

1  XI  Coijgrcs  Corporatif,  (Lyons,  1901"),  p.  29. 
-Ibid.,  p.  14.  ;!  Ibid.,  p.  69. 


122.  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [352 

federation  of  Labor  may  be  said  to  have  entered  defi- 
nitely upon  the  revolutionary  path.  The  main  ideas  of 
revolutionary  syndicalism  were  clearly  formulated  and 
consciously  accepted.  The  main  functionaries  elected 
after  the  Congress  were  revolutionists,  viz.,  the  secretary 
Griffuelhes  and  the  assistant  secretary  and  editor  of  the 
Voix  du  Peuple  Pouget. ' 

The  Congress  of  Montpellier  held  next  year  (1902) 
showed  constant  accentuation  of  the  revolutionary  tend- 
encies. The  Congress  of  Montpellier  was  almost  en- 
tirely occupied  with  the  elaboration  of  a  new  constitution 
which  would  unite  the  General  Confederation  and  the 
Federation  of  Bourses.  Statutes  acceptable  to  both 
organizations  were  adopted  to  go  into  force  on  January 
i,  1903. 

At  the  Congress  of  Montpellier  the  report  of  the  Sec- 
retary Griffuelhes  claimed  that  during  the  year  the  Con- 
federation had  made  progress.  But  this  progress  was 
very  slight.  The  real  growth  of  the  Confederation  be- 
gan after  its  fusion  with  the  Federation  of  Bourses. 
Since  then  also  dates  the  more  active  participation  of 
the  Confederation  in  the  political  and  social  life  of  the 
country.  But  before  taking  up  the  history  of  the  Gen- 
eral Confederation  since  1902,  it  seems  advisable  to  sum 
up  the  main  ideas  of  revolutionary  syndicalism  in  a  more 
systematic  way. 


CHAPTER  V 

THE  DOCTRINE  OF  REVOLUTIONARY  SYNDICALISM 

WHEN  the  General  Confederation  of  Labor  adopted  its 
new  constitution  in  1902,  the  main  ideas  of  revolution- 
ary syndicalism  had  already  been  clearly  formulated. 
Since  then,  however,  a  considerable  amount  of  literature 
has  appeared  on  the  subject,  either  clarifying  or  further 
developing  various  points  of  the  doctrine.  This  litera- 
ture consists  mainly  of  numerous  articles  in  the  periodi- 
cal press  and  of  pamphlets  and  is,  accordingly,  of  an 
unsystematic  character.  The  attempt  is  made  in  this 
chapter  to  sum  up  in  a  systematic  way  the  leading  ideas 
of  revolutionary  syndicalism  common  to  all  who  call 
themselves  revolutionary  syndicalists.  Consideration  of 
individual  ideas  and  of  contributions  of  particular  writers 
will  be  left  to  a  following  chapter. 

The  fundamental  idea  of  revolutionary  syndicalism  is 
the  idea  of  class-struggle.  Society  is  divided  into  two 
classes,  the  class  of  employers  who  possess  the  instru- 
ments of  production  and  the  class  of  workingmen  who 
own  nothing  but  their  labor-power  and  who  live  by  sell- 
ing it. 

Between  the  two  classes  an  incessant  struggle  is  going 
on.  This  struggle  is  a  fact,  not  a  theory  in  need  of 
proof.  It  is  a  fact  manifested  every  day  in  the  relations 
between  employers  and  wage-earners,  a  fact  inherent  in 
the  economic  organization  of  existing  society. 

The  class-struggle  is  not  a  fact  to  be  deplored;  on  the 
contrary,  it  should  be  hailed  as  the  creative  force  in  so- 
3531  122, 


124  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [354 

ciety,  as  the  force  which  is  working  for  the  emancipation 
of  the  working-class.  It  is  the  class-struggle  which  is 
consolidating  the  workingmen  into  a  compact  unity  op- 
posed to  the  exploitation  and  domination  of  employers. 
It  is  the  class-struggle  which  is  evolving  new  ideas  of 
right  (droit)  in  opposition  to  the  existing  law.  It  is 
the  class-struggle  which  is  developing  the  self-conscious- 
ness, the  will-power  and  the  moral  character  of  the 
workingmen  and  is  creating  forms  of  organization  proper 
to  them.  In  a  word,  it  is  the  class-struggle  which  is 
forging  the  material  and  moral  means  of  emancipation 
for  the  workingmen  and  putting  these  weapons  into 
their  hands. 

The  task  of  the  syndicalists  is  to  organize  the  more  or 
less  vague  class-feeling  of  the  workingmen  and  to  raise 
it  to  the  clear  consciousness  of  class-interests  and  of 
class-ideals.  This  aim  can  be  attained  only  by  organi- 
zing the  workingmen  into  syndicats.  The  syndicates  an 
association  of  workingmen  of  the  same  or  of  similar 
trades,  and  is  held  together  by  bonds  of  common  inter- 
est, j  In  this  is  its  strength.  Of  all  human  groupings  it 
is  the  most  fundamental  and  the  most  permanent,  be- 
cause men  in  society  are  interested  above  everything  else 
in  the  satisfaction  of  their  economic  needs. 

The  strength,  permanence,  and  class-character  of  eco- 
nomic groups  are  made  conspicuous  by  comparison  with 
forms  of  grouping  based  on  other  principles.  Political 
parties,  groups  of  idealists,  or  communities  professing  a 
common  creed,  are  associations  which  cannot  but  be 
weak  and  transient  in  view  of  their  heterogeneous  com- 
position and  of  the  accidental  character  of  their  bond  of 
union.  Political  bodies,  for  instance,  are  made  up  of 
men  of  various  interests  grouped  only  by  community  of 
ideas.  This  is  true  even  of  the  Socialist  party  which 


355]  REVOLUTIONARY  SYNDICALISM  125 

consists  of  manufacturers,  financiers,  doctors,  and  law- 
yers, as  well  as  of  workingmen.  Even  the  Socialist 
party  cannot,  therefore,  make  prominent  the  class- 
division  of  society,  and  tends  to  merge  all  classes  into 
one  conglomeration  which  is  unstable  and  incapable  of 
persistent  collective  action.  Only  in  groupings  of  real 
and  fundamental  interests  such  as  the  syndicats,  are  men 
of  the  same  conditions  brought  together  for  purposes 
inextricably  bound  up  with  life. 

The  syndicat  groups  men  of  one  and  the  same  trade 
in  their  capacity  of  workingmen  only,  regardless  of  any 
other  qualifications.  The  workingmen  entering  a  syndi- 
cat may  be  Catholics  or  Protestants,  Republicans, 
Socialists,  or  Monarchists,  they  may  be  of  any  color, 
race  or  nationality;  in  their  capacity  of  workingmen 
they  are  all  equally  welcome  and  legitimate  members  of 
the  syndicat.  A  workingman  enrolling  in  a  syndicat  is 
not  entering  a  party,  not  subscribing  to  a  platform,  nor 
accepting  a  creed.  He  is  simply  entering  into  a  relation 
which  is  forced  upon  him  by  his  very  position  in  society, 
and  is  grouping  himself  with  his  fellowmen  in  such  a 
way  as  to  derive  more  strength  for  himself  in  the  struggle 
for  existence,  contributing  at  the  same ~  time  to  the 
strength  of  his  fellowmen. 

These  conditions  make  the  syndicat  peculiarly  fit  to 
serve  the  interests  of  the  workingmen.  The  syndicat  is 
a  sphere  of  influence  which  by  the  volume  of  its  sugges- 
tion and  by  the  constancy  and  intensity  of  its  action 
shapes  the  feelings  and  ideas  of  the  workingmen  after  a 
certain  pattern.  /  In  the  syndicat  the  workingmen  forget 
the  things  which  divide  them  and  are  intent  upon  that 
which  unites  them.  In  the  syndicat  the  workingmen 
meet  to  consider  common  interests,  to  discuss  their 
identical  situation,  to  plan  together  for  defense  and  ag- 


126  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [356 

gression,  and  in  all  ways  are  made  to  feel  their  group- 
solidarity  and  their  antagonism  to  the  class  of  employers. 

In  view  of  this  the  syndicats  should  prefer  industrial 
unionism  to  craft  unionism.  The  separation  of  work- 
ingmen  into  trades  is  apt  to  develop  in  them  a  corporate 
spirit  which  is  not  in  harmony  with  the  class-idea.j  The 
industrial  union,  on  the  contrary,  widens  the  mental 
horizon  of  the  workingman  and  his  range  of  solidarity 
with  his  fellow  workers  and  thus  serves  better  to 
strengthen  his  class-consciousness. 

;  The  syndicat  is  the  instrument  with  which  the  work- 
irigmen  can  enter  into  a  "direct"  struggle  with  employ- 
ers. "  Direct  action  "  is  what  the  syndicalists  most  insist 
upon,  as  the  only  means  of  educating  the  workingmen 
and  of  preparing  them  for  the  final  act  of  emancipation. 
"  Direct  action"  is  action  by  the  workingmen  themselves 
without  the  help  of  intermediaries ;  it  is  not  necessarily 
violent  action,  though  it  may  assume  violent  forms ;  it 
is  the  manifestation  of  the  consciousness  and  of  the  will 
of  the  workingmen  themselves,  without  the  intervention 
of  an  external  agent :  it  consists  in  pressure  exerted  di- 
rectly by  those  interested  for  the  sake  of  obtaining  the 
ends  in  view. 

"  Direct  action "  may  assume  various  forms,  but  the 
principal  ones  in  the  struggle  against  employers  are  :  the 
strike,  the  boycott,  the  label,  and  sabotage, 

The  strike,  in  the  view  of  the  syndicalists,  is  the  mani- 
festation of  the  class-struggle  par  excellence.  The  strike 
brings  the  workingmen  face  to  face  with  the  employers 
in  a  clash  of  interests.  A  strike  clears  up,  as  if  by  a  flash 
of  lightning,  the  deep  antagonism  which  exists  between 
those  who  employ  and  those  who  work  for  employers. 
It  further  deepens  the  chasm  between  them,  consolida- 
ting the  employers  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  workingmen 


357] 


REVOLUTIONARY  SYNDICALISM 


on  the  other,  over  against  one  another.  It  is  a  revolu- 
tionary fact  of  great  value1 

All  strikes,  partial,  general  in  a  locality,  or  general  in 
some  one  trade,  have  this  revolutionary  influence,  par- 
ticularly when  they  are  conducted  in  a  certain  way.  If 
the  workingmen  rely  only  on  their  treasury,  the  strike 
degenerates  into  a  mere  contest  between  two  money 
bags  —  that  of  the  employer  and  that  of  the  syndicat  — 
and  loses  much  of  its  value.  Still  more  are  the  syndi- 
calists opposed  to  methods  of  conciliation  and  arbi- 
tration. /The  idea  of  the  revolutionary  syndicalists  is 
that  a  strike  should  be  won  by  Sturm  und  Drang,  by 
quick  and  energetic  pressure  on  employers.  The  finan- 
cial strength  of  workingmen  when  striking  should  not 
be  considered.  Money  may  be  supplied  by  contributions 
of  workingmen  of  other  trades  and  localities,  in  itself 
another  means  of  developing  the  solidarity  of  the  work- 
ing-class. Sometimes  a  strike  may  be  won  by  calling 
out  sympathetic  strikes  in  other  trades. 

Strikes  conducted  in  this  manner  yield  practical  re- 
sults and  serve  also  as  means  of  educating  the  working- 
men.  They  reveal  to  the  workingmen  their  power,  as 
producers,  and  their  importance  in  the  productive  sys- 
tem of  society.  The  label,  on  the  other  hand,  is  a  means 
of  bringing  home  to  the  workingmen  their  importance 
as  consumers,  and  of  making  them  wield  this  power  for 
their  own  benefit. 

The  boycott  reveals  the  power  of  the  workingmen, 
either  as  producers  or  as  consumers.  It  may  be  wielded 
against  an  employer  whose  shop  is  avoided,  or  against  a 
firm  in  its  capr.cify  as  seller.  It  is  an  effective  means  of 
forcing  employers  to  terms. 

Sabotage  consists  in  obstructing  in  all  possible  ways 
the  regular  process  of  production  to  the  dismay  and 


128  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [358 

disadvantage  of  the  employer.  The  manifestations  of 
sabotage  are  many,  varying  with  the  nature  of  the 
industry  and  with  the  ingenuity  of  the  workers.  In 
its  primitive  form,  sabotage  is  a  tacit  refusal  on  the  part 
of  the  workers  to  exert  properly  their  energy  or  skill  in 
the  performance  of  their  work,  in  retaliation  for  any  injus- 
tice which,  in  their  opinion,  had  been  inflicted  upon  them 
by  their  employers.  This  form  of  sabotage  includes  such 
practices  as  those  summarized  in  the  Scotch  Ca  Canny 
(slow  work  for  low  wages)  and  in  the  French  principle 
of  a  mauvaise  paye  mauvais  travail  (bad  work  for  bad 
pay). !  It  also  includes  the  recent  practices  of  the  railroad 
workers  in  Austria,  Italy,  and  France  who  disorganized 
the  railway  service  of  their  respective  countries  by 
obeying  literally  all  the  rules  and  regulations  of  the  ser- 
vice code  and  by  refusing  to  apply  discretion  and  com- 
mon sense  in  the  performance  of  their  duties.  The  dis- 
tinguishing characteristic  of  this  form  of  sabotage  is  that  in 
applying  it  the  workers  remain  within  the  limits  of  their 
contract  and  avoid  any  manifest  violation  of  the  law, 
though  the  loss  inflicted  upon  the  employer  may  be  very 
heavy. 

A  more  aggressive  form  of  sabotage  is  that  which  ex- 
presses itself  in  deliberate  damage  done  either  to  the 
product  of  labor  or  to  the  nature  of  the  service.  An  in- 
stance of  the  latter  was  the  so-called  greve  perlee  ap- 
plied by  the  French  railway  men,  which  consisted  in 
wilful  misdirection  of  baggage  and  of  perishable  merch- 
chandise.  This  form  of  sabotage  implies  disregard  for  the 
laws  of  property  and  for  the  clauses  of  the  labor  con- 
tract, but  it  is  carried  on  in  a  manner  which  makes  de- 
tection of  motive  very  difficult.1 

1  An  intermediate  form  of  sabotage  is  that  known  as  sabotage  a  bouche 
ouverte  (sabotage  of  the  open  mouth).     It  consists  in  the  disclosure  of 


359]  REVOLUTIONARY  SYNDICALISM 

From  this  form  of  sabotage  it  is  but  a  short  step  to 
the  most  aggressive  and  violent  kind  which  finds  expres- 
sion in  the  deliberate  and  open  disorganization  of  ma- 
chinery. This  form  of  sabotage  has  nothing  in  common 
with  the  destruction  of  machinery  practiced  by  unorgan- 
ized workers  during  the  early  stages  of  the  capitalist 
regime.  It  aims  not  at  the  destruction  of  the  machine 
as  a  means  of  production,  but  at  the  temporary  disa- 
bility of  the  machine  during  strikes  for  the  purpose  of 
preventing  employers  to  carry  on  production  with  the 
help  of  strikebreakers.  Even  in  this  most  aggressive 
form,  sabotage  may  involve  very  little  violence.  The 
syndicalists  strongly  condemn  any  act  of  sabotage  which 
may  result  in  the  loss  of  life. 

/Such  are  the  "direct"  methods  of  struggle  against 
employers.  But  the  revolutionary  syndicalists  have 
another  enemy,  the  State,  and  the  struggle  against  the 
latter  is  another  aspect  of  "direct  action." 

The  State  appears  to  the  syndicalists  as  the  political 
organization  of  the  capitalist  class.  Whether  monarchist, 
constitutional,  or  republican,  it  is  one  in  character,  an 
organization  whose  function  it  is  to  uphold  and  to  pro- 
tect the  privileges  of  the  property-owners  against  the 
demands  of  the  working-class.  The  workingmen  are, 
therefore,  necessarily  forced  to  hurl  themselves  against 
the  State  in  their  efforts  toward  emancipation,  and  they 
cannot  .succeed  until  they  have  broken  the  power  of  the 
State. 

The  struggle  against  the  State,  like  the  struggle 
against  the  employers,  must  be  carried  on  directly  by 

conditions  generally  withheld  from  the  public,  such  as  conditions  in 
hotel-kitchens  and  restaurants,  methods  of  weighing  and  measuring  in 
stores,  practices  followed  by  druggists,  frauds  resorted  to  by  contractors 
and  builders,  etc. 


1 30  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [-560 

the  workingmen  themselves.  This  excludes  the  partici- 
pation of  the  syndicats  in  politics  and  in  electoral  cam- 
paigning. The  parliamentary  system  is  a  system  of 
representation  opposed  in  principle  to  "  direct  action," 
and  serves  the  interests  of  the  bourgeoisie,  for  the  man- 
agement of  which  it  is  particularly  suited.  The  work- 
ingmen can  derive  no  benefit  from  it.  The  parlia- 
mentary system  breeds  petty,  self-seeking  politicians, 
corrupts  the  better  elements  that  enter  into  it  and  is  a 
source  of  intrigues  and  of  "  wire-pulling.  The  so-called 
representatives  of  the  workingmen  do  not  and  cannot 
avoid  the  contagious  influence  of  parliament.  Their 
policy  degenerates  into  bargaining,  compromising  and 
collaboration  with  the  bourgeois  political  parties  and 
weakens  the  class-struggle. 

The  syndicats,  therefore,  if  not  hostile,  must  remain  at 
least  indifferent  to  parliamentary  methods  and  inde- 
pendent of  political  parties.  They  must,  however,  un- 
tiringly pursue  their  direct  struggle  against  the  State. 
The  direct  method  of  forcing  the  State  to  yield  to  the 
demands  of  the  workingmen  consists  in  exerting  ex- 
ternal pressure  on  the  public  authorities.  Agitation  in 
the  press,  public  meetings,  manifestations,  demonstra- 
tions and  the  like,  are  the  only  effective  means  of  mak- 
ing the  government  reckon  with  the  will  of  the  work- 
ing-class. / 

By  direct  pressure  on  the  government  the  working- 
men  may  obtain  reforms  of  immediate  value  to  them- 
selves. Only  such  reforms,  gained  and  upheld  by  force, 
are  real.  All  other  reforms  are  but  a  dead  letter  and  a 
mtfans  of  deceiving  the  workingmen. 

\T he  democratic  State  talks  much  about  social  reforms, 
labor  legislation  and  the  like.  In  fact,  however,  all 
labor  laws  that  are  of  real  importance  have  been  passed 


361]  REVOLUTIONARY  SYNDICALISM  1^1 

only  under  the  pressure  of  the  workingmen.  Those 
which  owe  their  existence  to  democratic  legislators  alone 
are  devised  to  weaken  the  revolutionary  strength  of  the 
working-class.  Among  such  laws  are  those  on  concilia- 
tion and  arbitration.  All  democratic  governments  are 
anxious  to  have  Boards  of  Conciliation  and  of  Arbitra- 
tion, in  order  to  check  strikes  which  are  the  main  force 
of  the  working-class.  Workingmen  must  be  opposed  to 
these  reforms,  which  are  intended  to  further  the  har- 
mony and  collaboration  of  classes,  because  the  ideology 
of  class-harmony  is  one  of  the  most  dangerous  snares 
which  are  set  for  the  workingmen  in  a  democratic  State.1 
This  ideology  blinds  the  workingmen  to  the  real  facts  of 
inequality  and  of  class-distinctions  which  are  the  very 
foundations  of  existing  society.  It  allures  them  into 
hopes  which  cannot  be  fulfilled  and  leads  them  astray 
from  the  only  path  of  emancipation  which  is  the  struggle 
of  classes. 

Another  idea  which  is  used  by  the  democratic  State  for 
the  same  purpose  is  the  idea  of  patriotism.  "  Our  coun- 
try ",  "  our  nation  ",  are  mottoes  inculcated  into  the  mind 
of  the  workingman  from  his  very  childhood.  But  these 
words  have  no  meaning  for  the  workingman.  The  work- 
ingman's  country  is  where  he  finds  work.  In  search  of 
work  he  leaves  his  native  land  and  wanders  from  place  to 
place.  He  has  no  fatherland  (patrie]  in  any  real  meaning 
of  the  term.  Ties  of  tradition,  of  a  common  intellectual 
and  moral  heritage  do  not  exist  for  him.  In  his  exper- 
ience as  workingman  he  finds  that  there  is  but  one  real 
tie,  the  tie  of  economic  interest  which  binds  him  to  all 
the  workingmen  of  the  world,  and  separates  him  at  the 
same  time  from  all  the  capitalists  of  the  world.  The  in- 

1  The  fundamental  principle  of  democracy  is  that  all  citizens  are  equal 
before  the  law  and  that  there  are  no  classes  in  the  state. 


1 32  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [362 

ternational  solidarity  of  the  workingmen  and  their  anti- 
patriotism  are  necessary  consequences  of  the  class  strug- 
gle. 

The  democratic  State,  like  any  other  State,  does  not 
rely  upon  ideological  methods  alone  in  keeping  down  the 
workingmen.  It  has  recourse  to  brute  force  as  well. 
The  judiciary,  the  administrative  machinery  and  especially 
the  army  are  used  as  means  of  defeating  the  movements  of 
the  working-class.  The  army  is  particularly  effective  as  a 
means  of  breaking  strikes,  of  crushing  the  spirit  of  inde- 
pendence in  the  workingmen,  and  as  a  means  of  keeping 
up  the  spirit  of  militarism.  An  anti-militaristic  propa- 
ganda is  therefore,  one  of  the  most  important  forms  of 
struggle  against  the  State,  as  well  as  against  capitalism./ 

Anti-militarism  consists  in  carrying  on  in  the  army  a 
propaganda  of  syndicalist  ideas.  The  soldiers  are  re- 
minded that  they  are  workingmen  in  uniforms,  who  will 
one  day  return  to  their  homes  and  shops,  and  who  should 
not,  therefore,  forget  the  solidarity  which  binds  them  to 
their  fellow  workingmen  in  blouses.  The  soldiers  are 
called  upon  not  to  use  their  arms  in  strikes,  and  in  case 
of  a  declaration  of  war  to  refuse  to  take  up  arms.  The 
syndicalists  threaten  in  case  of  war  to  declare  a  general 
strike.  They  are  ardent  apostles  of  international  peace 
which  is  indispensable,  in  their  opinion,  to  the  success  of 
their  movement. 

r  By  "direct  action"  against  employers  and  the  State 
the  workingmen  may  wrest  from  the  ruling  classes  re- 
forms which  may  improve  their  condition  more  or  less. 
Such  reforms  can  not  pacify  the  working  class  because 
they  do  not  alter  the  fundamental  conditions  of  the  wage 
system,  but  they  are  conducive  to  the  fortification  of 
the  working-class  and  to  its  preparation  for  the  final 
struggle.  Every  successful  strike,  every  effective  boy- 


^63]  REVOLUTIONARY  SYNDICALISM 

cott,  every  manifestation  of  the  workingmen's  will  and 
power  is  a  blow  directed  against  the  existing  order ; 
every  gain  in  wages,  every  shortening  of  hours  of  work, 
every  improvement  in  the  general  conditions  of  employ- 
ment is  one  more  position  of  importance  occupied  on  the 
march  to  the  decisive  battle,  the  general  strike,  which 
will  be  the  final  act  of  emancipation. 

The  general  strike — the  supreme  act  of  the  class-war 
— will  abolish  the  classes  and  will  establish  new  forms  of 
society.  The  general  strike  must  not  be  regarded  as  a 
deus  ex  machina  which  will  suddenly  appear  to  solve  all 
difficulties,  but  as  the  logical  outcome  of  the  syndicalist 
movement,  as  the  act  that  is  being  gradually  prepared 
by  the  events  of  every  day.  However  remote  it  may 
appear,  it  is  not  a  Utopia  and  its  possibility  cannot  be 
refuted  on  the  ground  that  general  strikes  have  failed  in 
the  past  and  may  continue  to  fail  in  the  future.  The 
failures  of  to-day  are  building  the  success  of  to-morrow, 
and  in  time  the  hour  of  the  successful  general  strike  will 
come.  / 

What  are  the  forms  of  the  social  organization  which 
will  take  the  place  of  those  now  in  existence?  The 
Congress  of  Lyons  (1901)  had  expressed  the  wish  to  have 
this  question  on  the  program  of  the  next  Congress.  In 
order  that  the  answer  to  this  question  should  reflect  the 
ideas  prevalent  among  the  workingmen,  the  Confederal 
Committee  submitted  the  question  to  the  syndicats  for 
study.  A  questionnaire  was  sent  out  containing  the  fol- 
lowing questions  : 

(1)  How  would  your  syndicat  act  in  order  to  trans- 
form itself   from  a  group   for  combat   into  a  group  for 
production  ? 

(2)  How  would  you  act  in  order  to  take  possession  of 
the  machinery  pertaining  to  your  industry  ? 


134  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [364 

(3)  How  do  you  conceive  the  functions  of  the  organ- 
ized shops  and  factories  in  the  future? 

(4)  If  your  syndicat  is  a  group  within  the  system  of 
highways,  of  transportation  of  products  or  of  passengers, 
of  distribution,  etc.,  how  do  you  conceive  its  function- 
ing? 

(5)  What  will  be  your  relations  to  your  federation  of 
trade  or  of  industry  after  your  reorganization  ? 

(6)  On  what  principle  would  the  distribution  of  pro- 
ducts take  place  and  how  would  the  productive  groups 
procure  the  raw  material  for  themselves  ? 

(7)  What  part  would  the  Bourses  du  Travail  play  in 
the  transformed   society  and  what  would  be  their  task 
with  reference  to  the  statistics  and  to  the  distribution  of 
products  ? 

At  the  Congress  of  Montpellier,  in  1902,  a  number  of 
reports  were  presented  answering  the  above  questions. 
The  reports  were  in  the  name  of  the  syndicats  and  came 
from  different  parts  of  France.  Only  a  limited  number 
of  them  were  printed  as  appendices  to  the  general  report 
of  the  Congress.  Among  them,  it  may  be  interesting  to 
note,  was  the  report  of  the  syndicat  of  agricultural  labor- 
ers. The  rest  were  summed  up  in  the  official  organ  of 
the  Confederation,  La  Voix  du  Peuple. 

The  reports  differed  in  details.  Some  emphasized  one 
point  more  than  another  and  vice  versa.  But  the  gen- 
eral character  of  the  reports  was  identical  and  showed  a 
consensus  of  opinion  on  the  main  outlines  of  that  "  eco- 
nomic federalism  "  which  is  the  ideal  of  the  syndicalists. 

According  to  this  ideal,  the  syndicat  will  constitute 
the  cell  of  society.  It  will  group  the  producers  of  one 
and  the  same  trade  who  will  control  their  means  of  pro- 
duction. Property,  however,  will  be  social  or  col- 
lective, and  no  one  syndicat  will  be  the  exclusive  owner 


365]  REVOLUTIONARY  SYNDICALISM 

of  any  portion  of  the  collective  property.     It  will  merely 
use  it  with  the  consent  of  the  entire  society/ 

The  syndicat  will  be  connected  with  the  rest  of  society 
through  its  relations  with  the  Federation  of  its  trade, 
the  Bourse  du  Travail,  and  the  General  Confederation. 
With  the  National  Federation  relations  will  be  mainly 
technical  and  special,  and  the  role  of  the  Federation  will 
be  insignificant.  With  the  General  Confederation  rela- 
tions will  be  indirect  and  mainly  by  mediation  of  the 
Bourse  du  Travail.  Relations  with  the  latter  will  be  of 
permanent  importance,  as  the  Bourses  du  Travail  will 
be  the  centers  of  economic  activity. 

.  The  Bourse  du  Travail — in  the  ideal  system  of  the 
syndicalists — will  concentrate  all  local  interests  and  serve 
as  a  connecting  link  between  a  locality  and  the  rest  of 
the  world.  In  its  capacity  as  local  center  it  will  collect 
all  statistical  data  necessary  for  the  regular  flow  of  eco- 
nomic life.  It  will  keep  itself  informed  on  the  necessities 
of  the  locality  and  on  its  resources,  and  will  provide  for 
the  proper  distribution  of  products;  as  intermediary 
between  the  locality  and  the  rest  of  the  country  it  will 
facilitate  the  exchange  of  products  between  locality  and 
locality  and  will  provide  for  the  introduction  of  raw 
materials  from  outside. 

In  a  word,  the  Bourse  will  combine  in  its  organization 
the  character  both  of  local  and  of  industrial  autonomy. 
It  will  destroy  the  centralized  political  system  of  the 
present  State  and  will  counterbalance  the  centralizing 
tendencies  of  industry. 

To  the  General  Confederation  will  be  left  only  services 
of  national  importance,  railways  for  instance.  However, 
even  in  the  management  of  national  public  utilities 
the  National  Federation  and  the  Bourses  will  have  the 
first  word.  The  function  of  the  General  Confederation 


136  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [366 

will  consist  mainly  in  furnishing  general  information  and 
in  exerting  a  controlling  influence.  The  General  Con- 
federation will  also  serve  as  intermediary  in  international 
relations. 

In  this  social  system  the  State  as  now  constituted  will 
have  no  place.  Of  course,  one  may  call  the  ideal  system 
of  the  syndicalists  a  State.  All  depends  on  the  definition 
given  to  the  term.  But  when  the  syndicalists  speak  of 
the  State,  they  mean  an  organization  of  society  in  which 
a  delegated  minority  centralizes  in  its  hands  the  power 
of  legislation  on  all  matters.  This  power  may  be  broken 
up  and  divided  among  a  number  of  governing  bodies, 
as  in  the  federal  system  of  the  United  States,  but  it  does 
not  thereby  change  its  character.  The  essential  charac- 
teristic of  the  State  is  to  impose  its  rule  from  without. 
The  legislative  assemblies  of  the  present  State  decide 
upon  questions  that  are  entirely  foreign  to  them,  with 
which  they  have  no  real  connection  in  life  and  which  they 
do  not  understand.  The  rules  they  prescribe,  the  discip- 
line they  impose,  come  as  an  external  agency  to  inter- 
vene in  the  processes  of  social  life.  The  State  is,  there- 
fore, arbitrary  and  oppressive  in  its  very  nature. 

i  To  this  State-action  the  syndicalists  oppose  a  disci- 
pline coming  front  within,  a  rule  suggested  by  the  pro- 
cesses of  collective  life  itself,  and  imposed  by  those 
whose  function  it  is  to  carry  on  those  processes.  It  is, 
as  it  were,  a  specialization  of  function  carried  over  into 
the  domain  of  public  life  and  made  dependent  upon  in- 
dustrial specialization.  No  one  should  legislate  on  mat- 
ters unless  he  has  the  necessary  training.  The  syndicats, 
the  delegates  of  the  syndicats  to  the  Bourses  du  Travail, 
and  so  on,  only  they  can  properly  deal  with  their  re- 
spective problems.  The  rules  they  would  impose  would 
follow  from  a  knowledge  of  the  conditions  of  their  social 


-567]  REVOLUTIONARY  SYNDICALISM  137 

functions  and  would  be,  so  to  speak,  a  "  natural "  disci- 
pline made  inevitable  by  the  conditions  themselves.  Be- 
sides, many  of  the  functions  of  the  existing-  State  would 
be  abolished  as  unnecessary  in  a  society  based  on  common 
ownership,  on  co-operative  work,  and  on  collective  sol- 
idarity. The  necessary  functions  of  local  administration 
would  be  carried  on  by  the  Bourses  du  Travail. 

In  recent  years,  however,  revolutionary  syndicalists 
have  not  expatiated  upon  the  forms  of  the  future  society. 
Convinced  that  the  social  transformation  is  inevitable, 
they  have  not  thought  it  necessary  to  have  any  ready- 
made  model  upon  the  lines  of  which  the  social  organiza- 
tion of  the  future  should  be  carved.  The  revolutionary 
classes  of  the  past  had  no  idea  of  the  new  social  system 
they  were  struggling  for,  and  no  ready-made  plan  is 
necessary  for  the  working-class.  Prepared  by  all  pre- 
liminary struggle,  the  workingmen  will  find  in  themselves, 
when  the  time  comes,  sufficient  creative  power  to  remake 
society.  The  lines  of  the  future,  however,  are  indicated 
in  a  general  way  by  the  development  of  the  present,  and 
the  syndicalist  movement  is  clearly  paving  the  way  for  an 
"  economic  federalism  ". 

The  workingmen  are  being  prepared  for  their  future 
role  by  the  experiences  of  syndicalist  life.  The  very  strug- 
gle which  the  syndicats  carry  on  train  the  workingmen  in 
solidarity,  in  voluntary  discipline,  in  power  and  deter- 
mination to  resist  oppression,  and  in  other  moral  qualities 
which  group  life  requires.  Moreover,  the  syndicats,  par- 
ticulary  the  Bourses  du  Travail,  are  centers  where  edu- 
cational activities  are  carried  on.  Related  to  the  facts  of 
life  and  to  the  concrete  problems  of  the  day,  this  educa- 
tional work,  in  the  form  of  regular  courses,  lectures,  read- 
ings, etc.,  is  devised  to  develop  the  intellectual  capacities 
of  the  workingmen. 


1 38  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [368 

The  struggle  of  the  present  and  the  combat  of  the  fu- 
ture imply  the  initiative,  the  example  and  the  leadership 
of  a  conscious  and  energetic  minority  ardently  devoted 
to  the  interests  of  its  class.  The  experience  of  the  labor 
movement  has  proven  this  beyond  all  doubt.  The  mass 
of  workinmen,  like  every  large  mass,  is  inert.  It  needs 
an  impelling  force  to  set  it  in  motion  and  to  put  to  work 
its  tremendous  potential  energy.  Every  strike,  every 
labor  demonstration,  every  movement  of  the  working- 
class  is  generally  started  by  an  active  and  daring  minor- 
ity which  voices  the  sentiments  of  the  class  to  which  it 
belongs. 

The  conscious  minority,  however,  can  act  only  by  car- 
rying with  it  the  mass,  and  by  making  the  latter  partici- 
pate directly  in  the  struggle.  The  action  of  the  conscious 
minority  is,  therefore,  just  the  opposite  of  the  action  of 
parliamentary  representatives.  The  latter  are  bent  on 
doing  everything  themselves,  on  controlling  absolutely 
the  affairs  of  the  country,  and  are  therefore,  anxious,  to 
keep  the  massess  as  quiet,  as  inactive  and  as  submissive 
as  possible.  The  conscious  minority,  on  the  contrary,  is 
simply  the  advance-guard  of  its  class ;  it  cannot  succeed, 
unless  backed  by  the  solid  forces  of  the  masses ;  the 
awareness,  the  readiness  and  the  energy  of  the  latter  are 
indispensable  conditions  of  success  and  must.be  kept  up 
by  all  means. 

The  idea  of  the  "conscious  minority"  is  opposed  to 
the  democratic  principle.  Democracy  is  based  upon 
majority-rule,  and  its  method  of  determining  the  general 
will  is  universal  suffrage.  But  experience  has  shown 
that  the  "general  will"  is  a  fiction  and  that  majority- 
rule  really  becomes  the  domination  of  a  minority — 
which  can  impose  itself  upon  all  and  exploit  the  majority 
in  its  own  interests.  This  is  inevitably  so,  because  uni- 


-569]  REVOLUTIONARY  SYNDICALISM 

versal  suffrage  is  a  clumsy,  mechanical  device,  which 
brings  together  a  number  of  disconnected  units  and 
makes  them  act  without  proper  understanding  of  the 
thing  they  are  about.  The  effect  of  political  majorities 
when  they  do  make  themselves  felt  is  to  hinder  advance 
and  to  suppress  the  progressive,  active  and  more  devel- 
oped minorities. 

The  practice  of  the  labor  movement  is  necessarily  the 
reverse  of  this.  The  syndicats  do  not  arise  out  of  uni- 
versal suffrage  and  are  not  the  representatives  of  the 
majority  in  the  democratic  sense  of  the  term.  They 
group  but  a  minority  of  all  workingmen  and  can  hardly 
expect  ever  to  embrace  the  totality  or  even  the  majority 
of  the  latter.  The  syndicats  arise  through  a  process  of 
selection.  The  more  sensitive,  the  intellectually  more 
able,  the  more  active  workingmen  come  together  and 
constitute  themselves  a  syndicat.  They  begin  to  discuss 
the  affairs  of  their  trade.  When  determined  to  obtain 
its  demands,  the  syndicat  enters  into  a  struggle,  without 
at  first  finding  out  the  "general  will."  It  assumes 
leadership  and  expects  to  be  followed,  because  it  is  con- 
vinced that  it  expresses  the  feelings  of  all.  The  syndicat 
constitutes  the  leading  conscious  minority. 

The  syndicat  obtains  better  conditions  not  for  its 
members  alone,  but  for  all  the  members  of  the  trade  and 
often  for  all  the  workingmen  of  a  locality  or  of  the  coun- 
try. This  justifies  its  self-assumed  leadership,  because 
it  is  not  struggling  for  selfish  ends,  but  for  the  interests 
of  all.  Besides,  the  syndicat  is  not  a  medieval  guild  and 
is  open  to  all.  If  the  general  mass  of  workingmen  do 
not  enter  the  syndicats,  they  themselves  renounce  the 
right  of  determining  conditions  for  the  latter.  Benefit- 
ing by  the  struggles  of  the  minority,  they  cannot  but 
submit  to  its  initiative  and  leadership. 


140  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [370 

The  syndicat,  therefore,  is  not  to  be  compared  with 
"cliques,"  "rings,"  "political  machines,"  and  the  like. 
The  syndicat,  it  must  be  remembered,  is  a  group  of 
individuals  belonging  to  the  same  trade.  By  this  very 
economic  situation,  the  members  of  a  syndicat  are  bound 
by  ties  of  common  interest  with  the  rest  of  their  fellow- 
workingmen.  A  sense  of  solidarity  and  an  altruistic 
feeling  of  devotion  to  community  interests  must  neces- 
sarily arise  in  the  syndicat  which  is  placed  in  the  front 
ranks  of  the  struggling  workingmen.  The  leadership  of 
the  syndicalist  minority,  therefore,  is  necessarily  disin- 
terested and  beneficent  and  is  followed  voluntarily  by 
the  workingmen. 

Thus,  grouping  the  active  and  conscious  minority  the 
syndicats  lead  the  workingmen  as  a  class  in  the  struggle 
for  final  emancipation.  Gradually  undermining  the  foun- 
dations of  existing  society,  they  are  developing  within 
the  framework  of  the  old  the  elements  of  a  new  society, 
and  when  this  process  shall  have  sufficiently  advanced, 
the  workingmen  rising  in  the  general  strike  will  sweep 
away  the  undermined  edifice  and  erect  the  new  society 
born  from  their  own  midst. N 


CHAPTER  VI 
THE  THEORISTS  OF  REVOLUTIONARY  SYNDICALISM 

THE  writers  who  have  contributed  to  the  development 
of  revolutionary  syndicalism  may  be  divided  into  two 
groups.  One  comprises  men  who,  like  Pelloutier, 
Pouget,  Griffuelhes,  Delesalle,  Niel,  Yvetot  and  others, 
either  belong  to  the  working-class,  or  have  completely 
identified  themselves  with  the  workingmen.  The  other 
consists  of  a  number  of  "  intellectuals  "  who  stand  out- 
side of  the  syndicalist  movement. 

The  members  of  the  first  group  have  played  the  lead- 
ing part  in  building  up  the  syndicalist  movement.  Pel- 
loutier was  secretary  of  the  Federation  of  Bourses  from 
1894  to  1901  ;  Griffuelhes  was  secretary  of  the  General 
Confederation  of  Labor  from  1901  to  1908;  Pouget  was 
assistant  secretary  of  the  Confederation  and  editor  of  the 
Voix  du  Peuple  from  1900  to  1908;  Yvetot  has  been 
one  of  the  secretaries  of  the  Confederation  since  1902  ; 
Niel  was  secretary  of  the  General  Confederation  for  a 
short  time  in  1909,  and  the  others  now  occupy  or  have 
occupied  prominent  places  in  the  syndicalist  organiza- 
tions. 

The  close  connection  of  the  members  of  this  group 
with  the  syndicalist  movement  and  with  the  General 
Confederation  of  Labor  has  had  its  influence  upon  their 
writings.  Their  ideas  have  been  stimulated  by  close 
observation  of  the  facts  of  syndicalist  life,  and  the  course 
of  their  thought  has  been  determined  largely  by  the 
3/i]  Mi 


I42  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [372 

struggles  of  the  day.  There  is  a  stronger  emphasis  in 
their  writings  upon  methods,  upon  "  direct  action,"  and 
upon  relations  to  other  existing  groups.  There  is  less 
speculation  and  pure  theorizing.  In  other  respects  the 
men  of  this  group  differ.  They  have  come  from  differ- 
ent political  groupings  :  Pouget  and  Yvetot,  for  instance, 
from  the  Communist-Anarchists ;  Griffuelhes  from  the 
Allemanists.  They  have  different  views  on  the  relation 
of  revolutionary  syndicalism  to  other  social  theories, 
differences  which  will  be  brought  out  further  on. 

The  second  group  of  writers,  the  so-called  "  intel- 
lectuals" outside  the  syndicalist  movement,  have  grouped 
themselves  about  the  monthly  Le  Mouvement  Soctaliste, 
started  in  1899  by  M.  Hubert  Lagardelle,  a  member  of 
the  Socialist  Party,  and  about  the  weekly  La  Guerre 
Sociale,  of  which  Gustave  Herve  is  editor.  Le  Mouve- 
ment Socialiste  was  at  first  a  Socialist  monthly  review, 
but  accentuated  its  sympathy  for  the  syndicalists  as  time 
went  on,  and  became  an  expressly  revolutionary  syndi- 
calist organ  in  1904.  The  Mouvement  Socialiste  counted 
among  its  constant  contributors  down  to  1910  M. 
Georges  Sorel  and  Edouard  Berth.  These  three  writers, 
Sorel,  Lagardelle,  and  Berth,  have  tried  to  systematize 
the  ideas  of  revolutionary  syndicalism  and  to  put  them 
on  a  philosophical  and  sociological  basis.  The  most 
prolific  of  them  and  the  one  who  has  been  proclaimed 
"the  most  profound  thinker  of  the  new  school"  is  M. 
Georges  Sorel. 

M.  Georges  Sorel  has  written  on  various  subjects. 
Among  the  works  from  his  pen  are  volumes  on  Socrates, 
on  The  Historical  System  of  Renan,  on  The  Ruin  of  the 
Ancient  World,  a  number  of  articles  on  ethics  and  on 
various  other  topics.  The  works  that  bear  on  revolu- 
tionary syndicalism  which  alone  can  be  here  considered, 


373]  REVOLUTIONARY  SYNDICALISM 

are:  L'Avenir  Socialiste  des  Syndicats,  La  Decomposition 
du  Marxisme,  Introduction  a  f£conomie  Moderne,  Les 
Illusions  du  Progres,  Reflexions  sur  la  Violence,  and  a 
number  of  articles  in  various  periodicals. 

The  works  of  M.  Sorel  on  revolutionary  syndicalism 
stretch  over  a  period  of  ten  to  twelve  years  :  The  Social- 
ist Future  of  the  Syndicats  was  written  in  1897;  the 
second  edition  of  his  Reflections  on  Violence  appeared  in 
1910.  Within  this  period  of  time  the  thought  of  M. 
Sorel  has  not  only  steadily  developed  in  scope  but  has 
also  changed  in  many  essential  points.  It  would  require 
a  separate  study  to  point  out  the  changes  and  their  sig- 
nificance. This  is  out  of  the  question  in  this  study. 
The  salient  points  only  of  M.  Sorel's  theories  will  be 
treated  here,  therefore,  without  consideration  of  their 
place  in  the  intellectual  history  of  their  author. 

M.  Sorel  has  attached  his  theories  to  the  ideas  of 
Marx.  Revolutionary  syndicalism  is  to  M.  Sorel  but  the 
revival  and  further  development  of  the  fundamental  ideas 
of  Marx.  The  "new  school"  considers  itself,  therefore, 
"  neo-Marxist,"  true  to  "the  spirit"  of  Marx1  though 
rejecting  the  current  interpretations  of  Marx  and  com- 
pleting the  lacunae  which  it  finds  in  Marx.  This  work 
of  revision  it  considers  indispensable  because,  on  the  one 
hand,  Marx  was  not  always  "  well  inspired,"  2  and  often 
harked  back  to  the  past  instead  of  penetrating  into  the 
future ;  and  because,  on  the  other  hand,  Marx  did  not 
know  all  the  facts  that  have  now  become  known  ;  Marx 
knew  well  the  development  of  the  bourgeoisie,  but  could 
not  know  the  development  of  the  labor  movement  which 
has  become  such  a  tremendous  factor  in  social  life.3 

1  G.  Sorel,  L ' Avenir  Socialiste  des  Syndicats  (Paris,  1901),  p.  3. 
3G.  Sorel,  Reflexions  sur  la  Violence  (Paris,  1910),  p.  249. 
3 Ibid.,  p.  246. 


144  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [374 

The  "  new  school "  does  not  consider  itself  by  any 
means  bound  to  admire  "  the  illusions,  the  faults,  the 
errors  of  him  who  has  done  so  much  to  elaborate  the 
revolutionary  ideas."  '  What  it  retains  of  Marx  is  his 
essential  and  fruitful  idea  of  social  evolution,  namely,  that 
the  development  of  each  social  system  furnishes  the  ma- 
terial conditions  for  effective  and  durable  changes  in  the 
social  relations  within  which  a  new  system  begins  its  de- 
velopment. 2  Accordingly,  Socialists  must  drop  all  Uto- 
pian ideas :  they  must  understand  that  Socialism  is  to  be 
developed  gradually  in  the  bosom  of  capitalism  itself  and 
is  to  be  liberated  from  within  capitalistic  surroundings 
only  when  the  time  is  ripe. 

The  ripening  of  socialism  within  capitalism  does  not 
mean  merely  technical  development.  This  is  indispen- 
sable of  course  :  socialism  can  be  only  an  economic  sys- 
tem based  on  highly  developed  and  continually  progress- 
ing productive  forces ;  but  this  is  one  aspect  of  the  case 
only.  The  other,  a  no  less  if  not  more  important  aspect, 
is  the  development  of  new  moral  forces  within  the  old 
system  ;  that  is,  the  political,  juridical  and  moral  devel- 
opment of  the  working-class, 3  of  that  class  which  alone 
can  establish  a  socialist  society. 

This  was  also  the  idea  of  Marx :  "  Marx  also  saw  that 
the  workingmen  must  acquire  political  and  juridical 
capacity  before  they  can  triumph."4  The  revolution 
which  the  working-class  is  pursuing  is  not  a  simple  change 
in  the  personnel  or  in  the  form  of  the  government;  it  is 
a  complete  overthrow  of  the  "traditional  State"  which 
is  to  be  replaced  by  the  workingmen's  organizations. 
Such  a  complete  transformation  presupposes  "  high  moral 

1G.  Sorel,  Reflexions  sur  la  Violence  (Paris,  1910),  p.  249. 
*G.  Sorel,  L'  Avenir  Socialiste  des  Syndicats,  pp.  3-4. 
*  Ibid.,  p.  39.  .  *  Ibid.,  p.  4. 


375] 


REVOLUTIONARY  SYNDICALISM 


culture  "  in  the  workingmen  and  a  capacity  for  directing 
the  economic  functions  of  society.  The  social  revolution 
will  thus  come  only  when  the  workingmen  are  "  ready  " 
for  it,  that  is,  when  they  feel  that  they  can  assume  the 
direction  of  society.  The  "  moral  "  education  of  the 
working  class,  therefore,  is  the  essential  thing  ;  Socialism 
will  not  have  to  "organize  labor",  because  capitalism 
will  have  accomplished  this  work  before.  But  in  order 
that  the  working-class  should  be  able  to  behave  like  "free 
men  "  in  the  "  workshop  created  by  capitalism  ",  x  they 
must  have  developed  the  necessary  capacities.  Socialism, 
therefore,  reduces  itself  "  to  the  revolutionary  apprentice- 
ship "  2  of  the  workingmen;  "to  teaching  the  working- 
men  to  will,  to  instructing  them  by  action,  and  to  reveal- 
ing to  them  their  proper  capacities  ;  such  is  the  whole 
secret  of  the  socialist  education  of  the  people.  "  3 

The  workingmen  can  find  the  moral  training  necessary 
for  the  triumph  of  socialism  only  in  the  syndicats  and  in 
the  experience  of  syndical  life.  The  syndicats  develop 
the  administrative  and  organizing  capacities  of  the  work- 
ingmen. In  the  syndicats  the  workingmen  learn  to  do 
their  business  themselves  and  to  reject  the  dictatorship 
of  "  intellectuals  "  who  have  conquered  the  field  of  poli- 
tics which  they  have  made  to  serve  their  ambitions. 

The  greatest  organizing  and  educating  force  created 
by  the  syndicalist  movement  is  the  idea  of  the  general 
strike.  The  general  strike  means  a  complete  and  "ab- 
solute" revolution.  It  is  the  idea  of  a  decisive  battle 
between  the  bourgeoisie  and  the  working-class  assuring 
the  triumph  of  the  latter.  This  idea  is  a  "social  myth  " 
and  hence  its  tremendous  historic  force. 

1  G.  Sorel,  Reflexions  sur  /a  Violence,  pp.  289-5.  ''•Ibid.,  p.  42. 

*G.  Sorel,  Preface  to  Pelloutier's  Histoire  des  Bourses  du  Travail. 


146  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [376 

"  Social  myths  "  always  arise  during  great  social  move- 
ments. The  men  who  participate  in  great  social  move- 
ments, represent  to  themselves  their  actions  in  the  near 
future  in  the  form  of  images  of  battles  assuring  the  tri- 
umph of  their  cause.  These  images  are  "  myths."  The 
images  of  the  early  Christians  on  the  coming  of  Christ 
and  on  the  ruin  of  the  pagan  world  are  an  illustration  of 
a  "  social  myth."  The  period  of  the  Reformation  saw 
the  rise  of  "  social  myths,"  because  the  conditions  were 
such  as  to  make  it  necessary  for  the  "  men  of  heart " 
who  were  inspired  by  "  the  will  of  deliverance  "  to  create 
"  images  "  which  satisfying  their  "  sentiments  of  struggle  " 
kept  up  their  zeal  and  their  devotion. 

The  "social  myth"  presupposes  a  social  group  which 
harbors  an  intense  desire  of  deliverance,  which  feels  all 
the  difficulties  in  its  way  and  which  finds  deep  satisfac- 
tion in  picturing  to  itself  its  future  struggles  and  future 
triumph.  Such  images  must  not  and  cannot  be  analyzed 
like  a  thing;  they  must  be  taken  en  bloc,  and  it  is  par- 
ticularly necessary  to  avoid  comparing  the  real  historic 
facts  with  the  representations  which  were  in  circulation 
before  the  facts  took  place. 

"  Myths  "  are  indispensable  for  a  revolutionary  move- 
ment; they  concentrate  the  force  of  the  rising  class  and 
intensify  it  to  the  point  of  action.  No  myth  can  pos- 
sibly be  free  from  Utopian  conceptions.  But  the  Utopian 
elements  are  not  essential.  The  essentials  are  the  hope 
back  of  the  myth,  the  ideal  strengthened  by  the  myth, 
and  the  impatience  of  deliverance  embodied  in  the  myth. 

The  general  strike  is  the  "social  myth"  of  the  work- 
ing-class longing  for  emancipation.  It  is  the  expression 
of  the  convictions  of  the  working-class  "  in  the  language 
of  movement,"  the  supreme  concentration  of  the  desires, 
the  hopes,  and  the  ideals  of  the  working-class.  Its  im- 


377]  REVOLUTIONARY  SYNDICALISM  147 

portance  for  the  future  of  Socialism,  therefore,  is  para- 
mount. The  idea  of  the  general  strike  keeps  alive  and 
fortifies  in  the  workingmen  their  class-consciousness 
and  revolutionary  feelings.  Every  strike  on  account  of 
it  assumes  the  character  of  a  skirmish  before  the  great 
decisive  battle  which  is  to  come.  Owing  to  the  general 
strike  idea,  "  socialism  remains  ever  young,  the  attempts 
made  to  realize  social  peace  seem  childish,  the  desertion 
of  comrades  who  run  over  into  the  ranks  of  the  bour- 
geoisie, far  from  discouraging  the  masses,  excites  them 
still  more  to  revolt;  in  a  word,  the  rupture  (between 
bourgeoisie  and  working-class)  is  never  in  danger  of 
disappearing."  ; 

This  rupture  is  an  indispensable  condition  of  Social- 
ism. Socialism  cannot  be  the  continuation  of  democ- 
racy ;  it  must  be,  if  it  can  be  at  all,  a  totally  "  new  cul- 
ture "  built  upon  ideas  and  institutions  totally  different 
from  the  ideas  and  from  the  institutions  of  democracy. 
Socialism  must  have  its  own  economic,  judicial,  political 
and  moral  institutions  evolved  by  the  working-class  in- 
dependently from  those  of  the  bourgeoisie,  and  not  in 
imitation  of  the  latter. 

Sorel  is  bitter  in  his  criticism  of  democracy ;  it  is,  in 
his  view,  the  regime  par  excellence  in  which  men  are 
governed  "  by  the  magical  power  of  high-sounding  words 
rather  than  by  ideas  ;  by  formulas  rather  than  by  reasons ; 
by  dogmas  the  origin  of  which  nobody  cares  to  find  out, 
rather  than  by  doctrines  based  on  observation."2  It  is 
the  kingdom  of  the  professionals  of  politics,  over  whom 
the  people  can  have  no  control.  Sorel  thinks  that  even 
the  spread  of  knowledge  does  not  render  the  masses 

1  G.  Sorel,  Reflexions  stir  la  Violence,  p.  179. 

•  G.  Sorel,  Illusions  du  pro^res  (Paris,  1911),  p.  10. 


148  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [378 

more  capable  of  choosing  and  of  supervising  their  so- 
called  representatives  and  that  the  further  society  ad- 
vances in  the  path  of  democracy,  the  less  effective  does 
control  by  the  people  become.1  The  whole  system  of 
democracy,  in  the  opinion  of  M.  Sorel,  is  based  on  the 
"fiction  of  the  general  will"  and  is  maintained  by  a 
mechanism  (campaigning,  elections,  etc.)  which  can  re- 
sult only  in  demoralization.  It  delivers  the  country  into 
the  hands  of  "  charlatans,"  of  office-seekers  and  of  idle 
talkers  who  may  assume  the  air  of  great  men,  but  who 
are  never  fit  for  their  task. 

The  working-class  must,  therefore,  break  entirely  with 
democracy  and  evolve  from  within  itself  its  own  ideas 
and  original  institutions.  This  complete  rupture  be- 
tween the  ideas  of  the  past  and  those  of  the  future  con- 
tradicts the  conception  of  progress  now  in  vogue.  But 
the  conception  of  progress  is  rather  a  deception  than  a 
conception.  As  held  to-day,  it  is  full  of  illusions,  of 
errors,  and  of  misconceptions.  The  idea  of  progress  is 
characteristic  of  democracy  and  is  cherished  by  the  bour- 
geois classes  because  it  permits  them  to  enjoy  their  priv- 
ileges in  peace.  Lulled  by  the  optimistic  illusion  that 
everything  is  for  the  best  in  this  best  of  all  worlds,  the 
privileged  classes  can  peacefully  and  hopefully  pass  by 
the  misery  and  the  disorders  of  existing  society.  This 
conception  of  progress,  like  all  other  ideas  of  democracy, 
was  evolved  by  the  rising  middle  classes  of  the  eigh- 
teenth century,  mainly  by  the  functionaries  of  royalty 
who  furnished  the  theoretical  guides  of  the  Revolution. 
But,  in  truth,  the  only  real  progress  is  the  development 
of  industrial  technique2 — the  constant  invention  of  m?.- 
chinery  and  the  increase  of  productive  forces.  The  latter 

*G.  Sorel,  Illusions  du  Progrts,  p.  59.  *Ibid.,  p.  276. 


379]  REVOLUTIONARY  SYNDICALISM  149 

create  the  material  conditions  out  of  which  a  new  culture 
Arises,  completely  breaking  with  the  culture  of  the  past. 
v  One  of  the  factors  promoting  the  development  of  pro- 
ductive forces  is  "  proletarian  violence."  This  violence 
is  not  to  be  thought  of  after  the  model  of  the  "  Reign 
of  Terror"  which  was  the  creation  of  the  bourgeoisie. 
"  Proletarian  violence  "  does  not  mean  that  there  should 
be  a  "great  development  of  brutality"  or  that  "blood 
should  be  shed  in  torrents"  {verse  &  flats}?  It  means 
that  the  workingmen  in  their  struggle  must  manifest 
their  force  so  as  to  intimidate  the  employers;  it  means 
that  "  the  social  conflicts  must  assume  the  character  of 
pure  struggles  similar  to  those  of  armies  in  a  cam- 
paign."2 Such  violence  will  show  the  capitalist  class 
that  all  their  efforts  to  establish  social  peace  are  useless; 
the  capitalists  will  then  turn  to  their  economic  interests 
exclusively;  the  type  of  a  forceful,  energetic  "  captain  of 
industry"  will  be  the  result,  and  all  the  possibilities  of 
capitalism  will  be  developed. 

On  the  other  hand,  violence  stimulates  ever  anew  the 
class-feelings  of  the  workingmen  and  their  sentiments  of 
the  sublime  mission  which  history  has  imposed  upon 
them.  It  is  necessary  that  the  revolutionary  syndicalists 
should  feel  that  they  are  fulfiling  the  great  and  sublime 
mission  of  renovating  the  world;  this  is  their  only  com- 
pensation for  all  their  struggles  and  sufferings.  The 
feelings  of  sublimity  and  enthusiasm  have  disappeared 
from  the  bourgeois-world,  and  their  absence  has  con- 
tributed to  the  decadence  of  the  bourgeoisie.  The 
working-class  is  again  introducing  these  feelings  by  in- 
corporating them  in  the  idea  of  the  general  strike,  and 
is,  therefore,  making  possible  a  moral  rejuvenation  of 
the  world. 

1  G.  Sorel,  Reflexions  sur  la  Violence,  pp.  256-7.       *  Ibid.,  p.  150. 


150  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [380 

All  these  ideas  may  seem  tinged  with  pessimism.  But 
"nothing  very  great  (tres  haul}  has  been  accomplished 
in  this  world "  without  pessimism.1  Pessimism  is  a 
"metaphysics  of  morals"  rather  than  a  theory  of  the 
world;  it  is  a  conception  of  "  a  march  towards  deliver- 
ance" and  presupposes  an  experimental  knowledge  of 
the  obstacles  in  the  way  of  our  imaginings  or  in  other 
words  "a  sentiment  of  social  determinism"  and  a  feel- 
ing of  our  human  weakness.2  The  pessimist  "regards 
social  conditions  as  forming  a  system  enchained  by  an 
iron  law,  the  necessity  of  which  must  be  submitted  to  as 
it  is  given  en  bloc,  and  which  can  disappear  only  after  a 
catastrophe  involving  the  whole." 3  This  catastrophic 
character  the  general  strike  has  and  must  have,  if  it  is 
to  retain  its  profound  significance. 

The  catastrophic  character  of  the  general  strike  en- 
hances its  moral  value.  The  workingmen  are  stimulated 
by  it  to  prepare  themselves  for  the  final  combat  by  a 
moral  effort  over  themselves.  But  only  in  such  unique 
moments  of  life  when  "  we  make  an  effort  to  create  a 
new  man  within  ourselves  "  "  do  we  take  possession  of 
ourselves  "  and  become  free  in  the  Bergsonian  sense  of 
the  term.  The  general  strike,  therefore,  raises  socialism 
to  the  role  of  the  greatest  moral  factor  of  our  time. 

Thus,  M.  Sorel  having  started  out  with  Marx  winds 
up  with  Bergson.  The  attempt  to  connect  his  views 
with  the  philosophy  of  Bergson  has  been  made  by  M. 
Sorel  in  all  his  later  works.  But  all  along  M.  Sorel 
claims  to  be  "true  to  the  spirit  of  Marx"  and  tries  to 
prove  this  by  various  quotations  from  the  works  of 
Marx.  It  is  doubtful,  however,  whether  there  is  an 

'G.  Sorel,  Reflexions  sur  la  Violence,  p.  8. 

2 Ibid.,  p.  12.  !  3 Ibid.,  p.  13. 


381] 


REVOLUTIONARY  SYNDICALISM 


affinity  between  the  "spirit"  of  Marx  and  that  of  Pro- 
fessor Bergson.  It  appears  rather  that  M.  Sorel  has 
tacitly  assumed  this  affinity  because  he  interprets  the 
"  spirit  "  of  Marx  in  a  peculiar  and  arbitrary  way. 

Without  any  pretense  of  doing  full  justice  to  the  sub- 
ject, three  essential  points  may  be  indicated  which  per- 
haps sufficiently  prove  that  "  neo-Marxism  "  has  drifted 
so  far  away  from  Marx  as  to  lose  touch  with  his  "  spirit." 
These  three  points  bear  upon  the  very  kernel  of  Marx- 
ism :  its  conception  of  determinism,  its  intellectualism, 
and  its  emphasis  on  the  technical  factors  of  social  evolu- 
tion. 

The  Marxian  conception  of  social  determinism  is  well 
known.  The  social  process  was  thought  of  by  Marx  as 
rigidly  "  necessary,"  as  an  organic,  almost  as  a  mechani- 
cal process.  The  impression  of  social  necessity  one  gets 
in  reading  Marx  is  so  strong  as  to  convey  the  feeling  of 
being  carried  on  by  an  irresistible  process  to  a  definite 
social  end. 

In  M.  Sorel's  works,  on  the  contrary,  social  determin- 
ism is  a  word  merely,  the  concept  back  of  it  is  not  as- 
similated. M.  Sorel  speaks  of  the  general  strike  and  of 
Socialism  as  of  possibilities  or  probabilities,  not  of  neces- 
sities. In  reading  him,  one  feels  that  M.  Sorel  himself 
never  felt  the  irresistible  character  of  the  logical  category 
of  necessity. 

The  difference  in  the  second  point  follows  from  the 
difference  in  the  first.  Marx  never  doubted  the  pos- 
sibility of  revealing  the  secret  of  the  social  process. 
Trained  in  the  "  panlogistic  school,"  Marx  always  tacitly 
assumed  that  socialism  could  be  scientific,  that  the  pro- 
cedure of  science  could  prove  the  necessity  of  social 
evolution  going  in  one  direction  and  not  in  any  other. 
It  was  the  glory  of  having  given  this  proof  which  he 


152  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [382 

claimed  for  himself  and  which  has  been  claimed  for  him 
by  his  disciples. 

M.  Sorel  is  expressly  not  "true  to  the  spirit"  of 
Marx  in  this  point.  "  Science  has  no  way  of  foreseeing,"  ' 
says  he.  His  works  are  full  of  diatribes  against  the  pre- 
tention  of  science  to  explain  everything.  He  attributes 
a  large  role  to  the  unclear,  to  the  subconscious  and  to 
the  mystical  in  all  social  phenomena.  A  sentence  like 
the  following  may  serve  to  illustrate  this  point.  Says 
M.  Sorel : 

Socialism  is  necessarily  a  very  obscure  thing-,  because  it  treats 
of  production — that  is,  of  what  is  most  mysterious  in  human 
activity — and  because  it  proposes  to  realize  a  radical  trans- 
formation in  this  region  which  it  is  impossible  to  describe 
with  the  clearness  which  is  found  in  the  superficial  regions  of 
the  world.  No  effort  of  thought,  no  progress  of  knowledge, 
no  reasonable  induction  will  ever  be  able  to  dispel  the  mys- 
tery which  envelops  Socialism.2 

This,  according  to  Sorel,  is  just  what  "  Marxism  has 
recognized  "  :  M.  Sorel,  certainly,  "  knows  his  Marx." 

In  the  third  point,  M.  Sorel  "the  revolutionary  revis- 
ionist," comes  very  close  to  M.  Bernstein,  "  the  evolu- 
tionary revisionist."  The  coming  of  Socialism  is  made 
independent  of  those  technical  and  economic  processes 
which  Marx  so  much  emphasized.  The  conceptions  of 
the  concentration  of  capital,  of  proletarization,  etc.,  are 
given  up.  On  the  contrary,  Socialism  is  to  be  prepared 
by  the  "revolutionary  apprenticeship"  of  the  working- 
class,  an  apprenticeship  to  be  made  in  action  and  under 
the  influence  of  a  "  social  myth  "  created  by  imagination 

1  G.  Sorel,  L' Avenir  Socialiste  des  Syndicats,  p.  54. 
*G.  Sorel,  Reflexions  sur  la  Violence,  pp.  201-2. 


383]  REVOLUTIONARY  SYNDICALISM  153 

spurred  on  by  the  subconscious  will.  There  certainly 
are  pronounced  voluntaristic  elements  in  Marx,  but  this 
whole  conception  of  M.  Sorel  seems  to  attribute  to  Marx 
a  "  spirit "  by  no  means  in  harmony  with  his  make-up. 

Though  claiming  to  be  a  disciple  of  Marx,  M.  Sorel 
seems  to  be  more  in  harmony  with  Proudhon  whose 
works  he  often  quotes  and  whose  views,  particularly 
on  morals,  he  accepts.  But  besides  Proudhon  many 
other  writers  have  had  a  considerable  influence  on 
M.  Sorel.  Besides  Bergson,  already  mentioned,  Renan 
and  Nietzsche,  to  quote  but  two,  have  had  their  share  of 
influence  in  many  of  the  ideas  expressed  by  M.  Sorel. 
M.  Sorel  has  an  essentially  mobile  mind  quick  to  catch 
an  idea  and  to  give  it  a  somewhat  new  and  original  turn. 
He  lacks  the  ability  of  systematizing  his  views  and  his 
reader  must  have  considerable  patience  with  him.  The 
systematic  way  in  which  his  views  have  been  given  in 
this  chapter  is  rather  misleading;  M.  Sorel  himself  pro- 
ceeds in  a  quite  different  way;  he  deals  with  an  idea  for 
a  while  but  is  led  away  into  digression  after  digression, 
to  pick  up  the  thread  of  his  previous  argument  tens  of 
pages  later. 

Lack  of  system  makes  it  easier  for  contradictions  to 
live  together  without  detection.  It  also  predisposes  a 
writer  to  assimilate  and  to  transform  any  ideas  he  may 
meet.  With  Sorel  this  is  evidently  so,  though  his  main 
claim  is  "profundity."  The  pages  of  his  work  bristle 
with  the  word  approfondir  which  is  so  often  repeated 
that  it  makes  the  poor  reader  dizzy.  The  disappoint- 
ment is  sharp,  because  M.  Sorel  soon  loses  the  thread 
of  his  thought  before  having  had  time  to  fathom  his  sub- 
ject. His  works,  however,  savor  of  freshness  of  thought 
and  of  originality. 

Quite   a  different   writer   is   M.   Lagardelle.     His  ex- 


154  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [384 

position  is  regular,  systematic,  fluent,  and  clear.  While 
Sorel  is  mainly  interested  in  the  philosophical  aspect  of 
his  problems  and  has  been  called,  probably  sarcastically, 
by  M.  Jaures  "  the  metaphysician  of  revolutionary  syndi- 
calism," M.  Lagardelle  considers  the  economic  and 
political  aspects  of  the  new  doctrine.  His  works  need 
not  be  dwelt  upon  because  his  ideas  do  not  differ  essen- 
tially from  those  of  M.  Sorel.  Two  points,  however, 
may  be  singled  out ;  M.  Lagardelle,  though  criticizing 
democracy,  is  careful  to  point  out  that  Socialism  has 
been  made  possible  by  democracy  and  that  no  return  to 
ancient  political  forms  is  desired ;  secondly,  he  allows  a 
place  for  the  political  [socialist]  party  in  the  general 
social  system ;  its  role  is  to  attend  to  those  problems 
which  are  not  entirely  included  within  the  domain  of  in- 
dustrial activities. r 

While  the  "  Mouvement  Socialiste  "  devoted  its  atten- 
tion mainly  to  the  philosophical  and  sociological  aspects 
of  syndicalism,  the  weekly  La  Guerre  Sociale  took  up 
questions  of  policy  and  method,  particularly  the  ques- 
tions of  anti-militarism  and  anti-patriotism.  Gustave 
Herve  the  editor  of  the  paper,  attracted  widespread 
attention  by  his  attacks  on  the  army  and  on  the  idea  of 
patriotism,  and  became  the  enfant  terrible  of  the  French 
socialist  movement  because  of  his  violent  utterances  on 
these  questions.  On  other  questions  of  method,  M. 
Herve  was  no  less  violent  being  a  disciple  of  the  Blan- 
quists  who  believed  in  the  efficacy  of  all  revolutionary 
methods  including  the  general  strike.  However,  the 
theoretical  contributions  of  M.  Herve  to  the  philosophy 
of  the  movement  are  slight. 

Now,   what   are    the    relations  of   the    two  groups  of 

!H.  Lagardelle,  Le  Socialisms  Ouvrier  (Paris,  1911). 


-585]  REVOLUTIONARY  SYNDICALISM 

writers  described  in  this  chapter  and  what  part  has  each 
played  in  the  history  of  the  movement?  These  questions 
must  be  carefully  considered  if  a  correct  understanding 
of_revolutionary  syndicalism  is  desired. 

i  The  view  which  prevailed  outside  of  France  is  that 
M.  Sorel  and  his  disciples  "  created  "  the  theory  of  revo- 
lutionary socialism  in  opposition  to  the  parliamentary 
socialists,  and  that  they  have  been  able  to  impress  their 
ideas  upon  a  larger  or  smaller  portion  of  the  organized 
French  workingmen.  This  view  was  first  presented  by 
Professor  W.  Sombart  in  his  well-known  work  on  Social- 
ism and  the  Social  Movement,  and  has  made  its  way 
into  other  writings  on  revolutionary  syndicalism.  M. 
Sorel  is  often  spoken  of  as  the  "leader''  of  the  revolu- 
tionary syndicalists,  and  the  whole  movement  is  regarded 
as  a  form  of  Marxian  revisionism. 

This  view,  however,  is  a  "myth"  and  should  be  dis- 
carded. French  writers  who  have  studied  the  social 
movement  of  their  country  and  who  are  competent  judges 
have  tried  to  dispel  the  error  that  has  gotten  abroad.1 
The  theorists  of  the  Movement  Socialiste  themselves 
have  repeatedly  declined  the  "honor"  which  error  has 
conferred  upon  them.  M.  Lagardelle  has  reiterated 
time  and  again  that  revolutionary  syndicalism  was  born 
of  the  experience  of  the  labor  movement  and  worked 
out  by  the  workingmen  themselves.  M.  Sorel  has  said 
that  he  learned  more  from  the  syndicalist  workingmen 
than  they  could  learn  from  him.  And  in  an  article  re- 
viewing the  book  of  Professor  Sombart,  M.  Berth  has 
insisted  that  Professor  Sombart  was  in  error.  "  If  we 
had  any  part,"  wrote  he,  "it  was  the  simple  part  of  inter- 
preters, of  translators,  of  glossers;  we  have  served  as 

1  See  articles  of  Lagardelle,  G.  Weil  and  Cornelissen  in  the  Archiv 
fur  Sozialwissenchaft  und  Sozialpolitik,  1907-1910. 


!56  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [386 

spokesmen,  that's  all;  but  it  is  necessary  to  avoid  reduc- 
ing to  a  few  propositions  of  a  school,  a  movement  which 
is  so  essentially  working-class  and  the  leading  ideas  of 
which,  such  as  direct  action  and  the  general  strike,  are 
so  specifically  of  a  working-class  character."1 

This  must  not  be  taken  as  over-modesty  on  the  part 
of  "intellectuals"  who  are  careful  not  to  pose  as  leaders 
or  as  inspirers.  The  facts  are  there  to  prove  the  state- 
ments of  M.  Lagardelle  and  of  M.  Sorel.  The  idea  of 
the  general  strike  was  elaborated  by  workingmen-mem- 
bers  of  the  various  committees  on  the  general  strike. 
The  idea  of  "  direct  action,"  as  has  been  shown,  found 
its  defenders  in  the  first  Congresses  of  the  General  Con- 
federation of  Labor.  The  theory  of  the  social  role  of 
the  syndicat  was  formulated  by  Pelloutier  and  by  other 
members  of  the  "Federation  of  Bourses"  before  M. 
Sorel  wrote  his  little  book  on  The  Socialist  Future  of 
the  Syndicats. 

Even  the  statement  of  M.  Berth  must  be  somewhat 
modified.  The  theorists  of  the  Mouvement  Socialiste 
have  never  by  any  means  been  the  authorized  "  spokes- 
men "  of  the  revolutionary  syndicalists  of  the  General 
Confederation.  They  were  no  more  than  a  group  of  writers 
who,  watching  the  syndicalist  movement  from  the  out- 
side, were  stimulated  by  it  to  their  reflections  and  ideas. 
They  thought  they  found  in  the  syndicalist  movement 
"  a  truly  original  force  capable  of  refreshing  the  socialist 
conception  ",  and  they  formulated  their  ideas  on  the  sub- 
ject. They  never  took  any  part  in  the  movement,  and 
could  not  feel  themselves  its  representatives. 

What  then  was  their  influence?  In  general,  the  same 
as  that  of  other  socialist  writers.  They  were  and  are 

1  Les  Mouvement  Socialiste  (May,  1908),  p.  390. 


REVOLUTIONARY  SYNDICALISM 


157 


read  by  the  French  workingmen  just  as  Kropotkin, 
Jaures,  Proudhon  and  other  contemporary  or  former 
socialist  and  anarchist  writers,  and  as  many  non-socialist 
writers  are.  Naturally,  some  workingmen  came  more 
under  their  influence,  than  under  that  of  others  ;  and 
such  workingmen  may  be  disposed  to  look  upon  them  as 
their  theoretical  guides  and  leaders. 

But  even  the  latter  interpretation  is  by  no  means  ap- 
plicable to  all  the  theories  of  M.  Sorel,  for  the  main  ideas 
of  Sorel  seem  fundamentally  incapable  of  inspiring  a 
movement  of  large  masses.  The  theory  of  the  "  social 
myth  "  may  be  original  and  attractive,  but  if  accepted  by 
the  workingmen  could  not  inspire  them  to  action.  If 
"  images  of  battles  "  are  important  for  the  "  rising 
classes  "  as  an  impelling  force,  they  can  be  so  only  so 
long  as  they  are  naively  and  fully  believed  in.  The  worm 
of  reflection  must  not  touch  them.  The  "  men  longing 
for  deliverance  "  must  believe  that  the  future  will  be  just 
as  they  picture  it,  otherwise  their  enthusiasm  for  these 
pictures  would  find  no  nourishment.  Should  they  come 
to  realize  the  "  Utopian  "  and  "mythical"  character  of 
their  constructions  they  would  abandon  them. 

The  pessimistic  basis  of  M.  Sorel's  Weltanschauung 
may  appeal  to  literary  men,  to  students  of  philosophy 
and  to  individuals  longing  for  a  moral  theory.  It  can 
not  be  assimilated  by  a  mass  "  moving  toward  emanci- 
pation." When  one  reads  the  original  documents  of  the 
syndicalist  movement,  he  is  struck,  on  the  contrary,  by 
the  powerful  torrent  of  optimism  by  which  the  move- 
ment is  carried  along.  Only  a  strong  belief  in  a  "  speedy 
emancipation  "  created  the  enthusiasm  for  the  idea  of  the 
general  strike.  There  may  be  a  subconscious  pessimism 
back  of  this  optimism,  but  its  appearance  in  the  field  of 
clear  consciousness  would  have  been  destructive  for  the 
movement. 


158  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [388 

It  is,  therefore,  quite  natural  that  the  writers  repre- 
senting the  General  Confederation  of  Labor  who  address 
the  workingmen  directly  do  not  reproduce  these  theories 
of  M.  Sorel.  As  has  been  indicated  already,  their  writ- 
ings bear  a  different  stamp.  And  if  among  these  writers 
some,  as  for  instance  M.  Griffuelhes,  seem  to  have  come 
more  under  the  influence  of  the  group  Le  Mouvement 
Socialiste,  the  rest  occupy  an  independent  position  even 
from  the  theoretical  point  of  view. 

How  little  M.  Sorel  could  have  been  the  "  leader  "  of 
the  revolutionary  syndicalist  movement  may  be  illus- 
trated by  the  following  comparison.  At  the  Congress 
of  Lyons  in  1901  the  secretary  of  the  General  Confeder- 
ation of  Labor,  M.  Guerard,  wrote,  as  we  have  seen,  that 
the  Confederation  is  destined  to  transform  society.  In 
the  same  year,  M.  Sorel,  in  his  preface  to  Pelloutier's 
Histoire  des  Bourses  du  Travail,  wrote  :  "  The  Confed- 
eration of  Labor  appears  to  me  to  be  destined  to  become 
an  officious  Council  of  Labor,  and  an  academy  of  prole- 
tarian ideas,  which  will  present  its  wishes  to  the  govern- 
ment, as  the  large  agricultural  societies  do."  The  his- 
tory of  the  General  Confederation  of  Labor  since  1902, 
to  be  considered  in  the  following  chapter,  will  show  that 
M.  Sorel  missed  the  point  too  far  to  be  able  to  claim  the 
title  of  "leader"  whose  function,  presumably,  is  to  point 
out  the  way  and  not  to  acknowledge  it,  after  it  has  once 
been  taken.) 

It  is  necessary  to  bear  all  this  in  mind  in  order  to  grasp 
the  real  character  of  revolutionary  syndicalism.  M.  Sorel 
has  recently  renounced  his  revolutionary  syndicalist  ideas. 
In  December,  1910,  he  wrote  to  the  Italian  revolutionary 
syndicalists  who  invited  him  to  their  Congress  at  Boulogne  : 

It  seems  to  the  author   [of  the  Reflections  on    Violence]   that 


389]  REVOLUTIONARY  SYNDICALISM 

syndicalism  has  not  realized  what  was  expected  from  it. 
Many  hope  that  the  future  will  correct  the  evils  of  the  present 
hour ;  but  the  author  feels  himself  too  old  to  live  in  distant 
hopes  ;  and  he  has  decided  to  employ  the  remaining-  years  of 
his  life  in  the  deepening  (approfundir)  of  other  questions 
which  keenly  interest  the  cultivated  youth  of  France.  ' 

Previous  to  that,  M.  Sorel  and  M.  Berth  had  both  prom- 
ised collaboration  in  a  so-called  neo-monarchist  monthly, 
La  Cite  Prancaise,  which,  however,  did  not  see  the  light. 
This  probably  seemed  to  them  natural  in  view  of  their  op- 
position to  democracy.  But  under  the  political  conditions 
of  France  such  an  act  could  not  but  shock  the  working- 
men  who  may  criticise  democracy  but  who  are  bitterly 
opposed  to  everything  connected  with  the  ancien  r&gime. 
This  act  of  M.  Sorel  and  M.  Berth  weakened  the  group 
of  Le  Mouvement  Socialiste  which,  however,  is  still  pub- 
lished by  M.  Lagardelle,  though  with  less  force  and  kclat 
than  before.  The  act  of  M.  Sorel,  however,  could  have 
no  perceptible  significance  for  the  revolutionary  syndica- 
list movement.  The  latter  is  led  by  other  leaders  and  is 
determined  in  its  march  by  other  influences. 
(  The  revolutionary  syndicalist  ideas  embodied  in  the 
movement  represented  by  the  General  Confederation  of 
Labor  were  evolved,  as  has  been  shown,  in  the  syndica- 
list organizations  of  France.  The  Anarchists  entering 
the  syndicats  largely  contributed  to  the  revolutionary 
turn  which  the  syndicats  took.  Their  influence,  hailed  by 
some,  deplored  by  others,  is  recognized  by  all.  The  An- 
archists themselves  often  speak  as  if  they  "created"  the 
entire  movement,  though  this  is  an  exaggeration.  The 
role  of  the  Allemanists  has  been  considerable,  as  was 
shown  in  the  preceding  chapters.  And  the  more  definite 

1  Le  Mouvement  Socialiste  (March,  1911),  pp.  184-5. 


160  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [390 

formulation  of  revolutionary  syndicalist  ideas  in  the  period 
of  "  Millerandism  "  was  the  work  of  revolutionary  social- 
ist workingmen  of  ali  brands — Allemanists,  Anarchists, 
Blanquists  and  others.  \ 

This  clears  up  the  question  of  the  relation  of  revolu- 
tionary syndicalism  to  other  social  theories.  The  the- 
orists of  the  Mouvement  Socialiste  have  proclaimed  revo- 
lutionary syndicalism  as  a  new  social  theory.  They  have 
been  very  persistent  in  trying  to  delimit  their  theoretical 
dominion  from  parliamentary  socialism  on  the  one  hand, 
and  from  Anarchism  on  the  other.  From  the  latter  par- 
ticularly they  wished  to  be  separated,  feeling  as  they  did 
how  dangerously  close  they  came  to  it.  Many  working- 
men  have  accepted  this  view,  proud  to  proclaim  that 
they  have  evolved  a  theory  of  their  own — the  theory  of 
the  working-class. 

Others,  however,  have  taken  the  correct  point  of  view. 
They  see  that  the  main  ideas  of  revolutionary  syndicalism 
cannot  be  said  to  be  new.  They  may  all  be  found  in  the 
old  "  International  Association  of  Workingmen,"  and 
especially  in  the  writings  of  the  Bakounist  or  federalist 
wing  of  that  Association.  If  not  the  terms,  the  ideas 
on  direct  action,  on  the  general  strike,  on  the  social  role 
of  the  syndicat,  and  on  the  future  "  economic  federalism  " 

ray  all  be  found  there  more  or  less  clearly  stated.1 
Revolutionary    syndicalism    appears    then,    from    this 
point  of  view  not  as  a  new  theory,  but  as  a  return  to  the 

old   theories  of  the  "  International "  in  which  the  com- 

. 

bined  influence  of  Proudhon,  Marx  and  Bakounin  mani- 
fested itself.  The  formulation  of  revolutionary  syndical- 
ism, however,  is  not  to  any  great  degree  a  conscious 
return  to  old  ideas,  though  this  conscious  factor  had  its 

JJ.  Guillaume,  L'  Internationale,  vols.  i-iii;  also  Report  of  7th  Con- 
gress of  "  International  "  in  Brussels  in  1874. 


391  ] 


REVOLUTIONARY  SYNDICALISM 


part;  Pelloutier,  for  instance,  was  expressly  guided  by 
the  conceptions  of  Proudhon  and  Bakounin.  References 
to  the  "  International  "  are  also  frequent  in  the  discus- 
sions of  the  Congresses  of  the  General  Confederation. 
The  more  important  factors,  however,  were  the  condi- 
tions of  the  French  syndical  movement  itself.  The  work- 
ingmen  of  different  socialist  groups  meeting  on  the 
common  ground  of  the  syndicat  had  to  attenuate  their 
differences  and  to  emphasize  their  common  points. 
Thus,  by  a  process  of  elimination  and  of  mutual  influ- 
ence a  common  stock  of  ideas  was  elaborated  which,  ab- 
sorbing the  quintessence  of  all  socialist  theories,  became 
what  is  known  as  revolutionary  syndicalism.  Its  simi- 
larity to  the  ideas  of  the  "  International  "  is  partly  due 
to  the  fact  that  in  the  "International"  similar  condi- 
tions existed. 

Mainly  worked  out  in  the  practice  of  the  syndicalist 
movement,  the  ideas  of  revolutionary  syndicalism  are 
also  mainly  determined  in  their  further  evolution  by  this 
practice.  The  ideas,  therefore,  must  be  judged  in  con- 
nection with  the  conditions  in  which  they  developed. 
These  conditions  will  be  further  described  in  the  follow- 
ing chapters. 


CHAPTER  VII 

THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR  SINCE  1902 

BEFORE  taking  up  the  history  of  the  Confederation 
after  1902,  a  general  outline  of  the  constitution  adopted 
at  Montpellier  must  be  given.  Passim  will  be  indicated 
the  changes  that  have  been  made  since. 

The  General  Confederation  of  Labor  consists  of  Na- 
tional Federations  of  industries  and  trades,1  of  National 
Syndicats,  of  isolated  single  syndicats  (in  that  case  only 
if  there  is  no  national  or  regional  federation  of  the  trade, 
or  if  the  federation  does  not  adhere  to  the  Confedera- 
tion), and  of  Bourses  du  Travail,  considered  as  local, 
departmental  or  regional  central  unions.2 

1  In  1906  the  statutes  were  so  modified  as  to  admit  no  new  trade  fed- 
erations.    This  was  a  decided  step  in  the  direction  of  the  industrial  form 
of  organization. 

2  At  the  last  congress  of  the  Confederation  which  was  held  in  Havre 
in  September,  1912,  a  resolution  was  passed  that  the  Bourses  du  Travail 
in  each  Department   of   France   should   form   Departmental    Unions 
(Unions  Departmentales),  and  that  on  January  i,  1914,  these  Depart- 
mental Unions  should  take  the  place  of  the  Bourses  du  Travail  in  the  or- 
ganization of  the  Confederation.     The  resolution  has  not  yet  been  fully 
carried  into  effect,  and  the  process  of  reorganization  is  still  going  on. 
When  it  is  completed,  the  General  Confederation  of  Labor  will  emerge 
with  a  more  compact  and  centralized  form  of  organization  embracing 
Federations  of  industry,  on  the  one  hand,  and  Departmental  Unions,  on 
the  other.    The  single  Bourses  will  not  disappear,  and  their  functions  will 
not  be  curtailed;  but  they  will  henceforth  form  the  constituent  elements 
of  the  more  comprehensive  Departmental  Unions  and  will  have  no  in- 
dividual representation  in  the   Confederal   Committee.     The  reorgan- 
ization was  made  necessary  by  the  rapid  growth  of  Bourses  du  Travail, 

162  [392 


393] 


THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR 


Every  syndicat  adhering  to  the  Confederation  must 
fulfil  the  condition  of  so-called  "  double  adherence  ;  " 
that  is,  it  must  belong  to  its  national  federation  of  in- 
dustry or  trade,  and  to  the  Boitrse  du  Travail  of  its 
locality.  Besides,  every  federation  must  have  at  least 
one  subscription  to  the  Voix  du  Peuple,  which  is  the 
official  organ  of  the  Confederation.  These  conditions, 
however,  were,  and  still  are  disregarded  by  a  consider- 
able number  of  syndicats.1 

The  General  Confederation  is  represented  by  the  Con- 
federal  Committee  which  is  formed  by  delegates  of  the 
adhering  organizations.  Each  organization  is  represented 
by  one  delegate  in  the  Confederal  Committee.  This  point 
should  be  noticed  as  it  is  the  cause  of  struggle  within  the 
Confederation.  It  means  that  a  large  Federation  has 
only  one  delegate  and  one  vote  in  the  Confederal  Com- 
mittee, just  as  another  smaller  Federation.  The  num- 
ber of  delegates  in  the  Confederal  Committee,  however. 
is  not  always  equal  to  the  number  of  adhering  organiza- 
tions, because  one  delegate  may  represent  as  many  as 
three  organizations.  The  delegates  must  be  workingmen 
who  have  been  members  of  their  syndicat  for  at  least  a 
year. 

The  General  Confederation  has  five  central  organs  ;  two 
sections  and  three  commissions.  The  first  section  is 
called  :  "  The  Section  of  Federations  of  trades  and  of  in- 
dustries and  of  isolated  syndicats  ;  "  the  second  is  "  The 

the  number  of  which  far  outstripped  the  number  of  Federations  of  in- 
dustry and  which  thus  controlled  the  policies  of  the  Confederal  Com- 
mittee. The  number  of  the  Departmental  Unions  can  not  exceed 
eighty-seven  (87),  as  there  are  but  eighty-seven  political  subdivisions 
in  France  called  Departments. 

1  E.  Pouget,  Le  Confederation  G£n£rale  du  Travail  (Paris,  1908),  p. 
16. 


164  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [-594 

Section  of  the  Federation  of  Bourses  du  Travail.  "  *  The 
three  commissions  are  (i)  the  Commission  of  the  jour- 
nal ;  (2)  the  Commission  of  strikes  and  of  the  general 
strike,  and  (3)  the  Commission  of  Control. 

The  two  sections  are  autonomous  in  their  internal  af- 
fairs. The  first  section  is  formed  by  the  delegates  of  the 
National  Federations  of  trades  and  industries.  They  take 
the  name  of  Comite  des  Federations  d'industries  et  de 
metiers.  This  section  appoints  it  own  secretary,  assistant 
secretary,  treasurer,  assistant  treasurer,  and  archivist, 
who  form  the  executive  committee  of  the  section.  This 
section  collects  monthly  from  every  adhering  organiza- 
tion 40  centimes 2  for  every  hundred  members,  or  for  any 
fraction  of  a  hundred  ;  isolated  syndicats  pay  five  centimes 
monthly  for  each  member. 

The  Sections  of  Federations  of  industries  and  trades 
is  convened  by  its  secretary  and  meets  whenever  neces- 
sary. Its  functions  are  to  promote  the  organization  of 
new  federations  and  to  maintain  relations  between  the 
adhering  federations,  It  takes  "  all  measures  necessary 
for  the  maintenance  of  syndical  action  in  the  field  of  eco- 
nomic struggle. "  It  also  tries  to  induce  isolated  syndi- 
cats to  join  their  Bourses  du  Jravail. 

The  "  Section  of  the  Federation  of  Bourses  du  Tra- 
vail" is  formed  by  the  delegates  of  the  local,  depart- 
mental and  regional  central  unions.  The  delegates  take 
the  title  of  Comite  des  Bourses  du  T'ravail.3  The  sec- 
tion appoints  its  own  secretary,  assistant  secretary, 

1  From  Jan.  I,  1914,  called  the  "  Section  of  the  Federation  of  Depart- 
mental Unions.  " 

'*  Increased  in  1909  to  60  centimes.  For  further  increase  see  page  195. 

s  When  the  reorganization  is  completed,  this  section  will  consist  of 
one  delegate  from  each  Departmental  Union,  who  will  form  the  ContitS 
des  Onions  Departmentales .  See  note  2  on  page  162. 


395 ]   THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR    ^5 

treasurer,  assistant  treasurer,  and  archivist,  and  these 
five  members  form  the  executive  committee  of  the  sec- 
ond section.  It  collects  from  the  Bourses  du  Travail 
35  centimes  monthly  for  each  adhering  syndicat.1 

The  second  section  promotes  the  creation  of  new 
Bourses  du  Travail  and  coordinates  the  activities  of  the 
adhering  Bourses.  Its  functions  embrace  "  everything 
that  bears  upon  syndical  administration  and  upon  the 
moral  education  of  the  vvorkingmen; "  its  task  is  to 
collect  statistics  of  production,  of  consumption,  of  un- 
employment; to  organize  gratuitous  employment  bu- 
reaus, to  watch  the  progress  of  labor  legislation,  etc.  It 
also  tries  to  induce  single  syndicats  to  join  their  national 
federations.  This  section  also  meets  whenever  necessary 
at  the  invitation  of  its  secretary. 

The  Commission  of  the  Journal  is  composed  of  twelve 
members,  six  from  each  section.  It  appoints  its  own 
secretary.  The  journal  must  be  edited  only  by  work- 
ingmen-members  of  the  Confederation. 

The  Commission  of  strikes  and  of  the  general  strike 
consists  also  of  twelve  members,  six  from  each  section, 
and  appoints  its  own  secretary.  The  functions  of  this 
commission  are:  to  study  the  strike  movement  in  all 
countries,  to  send  speakers  and  organizers  to,  and  to 
collect  subscriptions  in  favor  of  workingmen  on  strike, 
to  make  propaganda  for  the  general  strike,  and  to 
promote  "the  penetration  of  this  idea  into  the  minds 
of  organized  workingmen."  For  this  purpose  the 
commission  creates  wherever  possible  sub-committees 
of  the  general  strike.  This  commission  has  its  own 
resources  which  consist  of  50  per  cent  of  all  money 
collected  by  the  sub-committees,  and  of  50  per  cent 

1  Changed  in  1909  to  five  centimes  for  each  member  per  year. 


1 66  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE 

of  the  assessments  collected  by  both  sections  of  the 
Confederation. 

The  Commission  of  Control  is  also  formed  of  twelve 
members,  six  from  each  section;  it  verifies  the  financial 
reports  of  both  sections  and  of  the  other  two  commis- 
sions. It  appoints  its  own  secretary. 

The  Confederal  Committee  is  formed  by  the  delegates 
of  both  sections.  It  meets  every  three  months,  except 
in  extraordinary  cases.  It  executes  the  decisions  of  the 
Congresses,  intervenes  in  all  issues  concerning  the 
working-class  and  decides  upon  all  questions  of  a  gen- 
eral character. 

The  Confederal  Bureau J  consists  of  thirteen  members, 
of  the  ten  members  of  the  bureaus  of  both  sections  and 
of  the  three  secretaries  of  the  three  commissions.  The 
Confederal  Bureau  summons  the  Confederal  Committee 
and  executes  the  decisions  of  the  latter.  The  secretary 
of  the  "Section  of  Federations"  is  the  general  secretary 
of  the  Confederation.  The  Confederal  Bureau  is  re- 
newed after  every  Congress,  that  is  every  two  years, 
but  functionaries  whose  terms  have  expired  may  be  re- 
elected. 

Article  37  of  the  statutes  adopted  read:  "  The  General 
Confederation  of  Labor,  based  on  the  principles  of  fed- 
eralism and  of  liberty,  assures  and  respects  the  complete 
autonomy  of  the  organizations  which  conform  to  the 
present  statutes."  The  Bourses  du  Travail  and  the 
Federations  of  industries  and  of  trades  were,  therefore, 
to  pursue  independently  the  activities  that  concerned 
them  alone.  The  Bourses  du  Travail  continued  in  the 
main  the  activities  described  in  the  third  chapter.  Their 
growth  was  steady  both  in  number  of  organizations  and 

1  Executive  Committee. 


397]       THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR         167 
in  membership,  as  may  be  seen  from  the  following  table: 


Number  of  Bourses 
belonging  to  the 
Confederation 
of  Labor. 

Number  of  Syndicats 
in  Bourses  of 
Confederation. 

igO2    

83 

J 

1,112 

IQ04 

no 

1.  140 

1,609 

157 

2  028 

154 

I  826 

1  9  1  2     

After  1906  Bourses  of  the  same  region  or  Department 
began  to  form  regional  and  Departmental  Unions  in 
order  to  coordinate  their  activities  and  to  influence 
larger  groups  of  the  working  population.  This  has  led 
to  the  process  described  above,  which  is  transforming 
the  basis  of  representation  in  the  General  Confederation 
of  Labor. 

In  matters  of  administration  the  Ztourses  du  Travail 
have  made  a  step  in  advance  since  the  early  part  of  the 
century.  They  have  succeeded  in  organizing  the  via- 
ticum (aid  to  workingmen  traveling  from  town  to  town 
in  search  of  work)  on  a  national  basis,  and  have  amplified 
their  services  as  employment  bureaus.  They  are  now 
systematizing  their  statistical  work  by  making  monthly 
and  quarterly  reports  on  the  state  of  employment  in  their 
locality,  on  strikes,  on  the  growth  of  organization,  and 
on  other  industrial  matters  of  interest.  Their  financial 
situation  has  been  considerably  improved,  and  in;a  num- 
ber of  cities  they  have  left  the  municipal  buildings  and 


1 68  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [398 

have  built  their  own  "people's  houses"  (maisons  du 
peitple) . 

Regard  for  matters  of  administration  has  not  dimin- 
ished the  zeal  of  the  Bourses  for  anti-militaristic  propa- 
ganda. Most  of  them  have  organized  in  recent  years 
the  so-called  Sou  du  Soldat  (Soldier's  Penny).  They 
send  financial  aid  to  workingmen  who  are  doing  military 
service,  invite  them  to  the  social  gatherings  of  the  syndi- 
cats,  distribute  syndicalist  literature  among  them,  and 
in  all  ways  try  to  maintain  in  the  soldiers  a  feeling  of 
solidarity  with  the  organized  workers: 

The  Federations  of  industries  and  trades  after  1902 
concentrated  their  attention  upon  their  particular  trade 
and  industrial  interests.  The  story  of  these  Federations 
is  the  story  of  organization,  education,  and  strikes  which 
can  not  be  told  here  in  detail. 

While  the  Bourses  and  industrial  federations  attended 
to  the  particular,  local  and  administrative  interests  of 
their  respective  organizations,  the  General  Confederation 
of  labor  intervened  or  took  the  initiative  in  questions 
that  interested  all  or  a  considerable  part  of  all  working- 
men.  The  new  statutes  went  into  force  on  January  i, 
1903.  The  elections  secured  the  predominance  of  the 
revolutionary  syndicalists  in  the  Confederal  Committee ; 
Griffuelhes  was  elected  secretary  of  the  Confederation  ; 
Pouget,  assistant ;  Yvetot,  secretary  of  the  Section  of 
Bourses.  In  October  of  the  same  year  the  Confederal 
Committee  was  summoned  to  an  extraordinary  meeting 
to  consider  the  question  of  the  suppression  of  employ- 
ment^bureaus.  This  question  had  agitated  a  considerable 
part  of  the  working-class  for  many  years.  The  work- 
ingmen had  protested  time  and  again  against  the  methods 
and  procedure  of  these  bureaus,  and  their  protests  had 
been  found  to  be  well  founded  by  all  who  investigated 


399]       THE  GENERAL  COX  FEDERATION  OF  LABOR         ifrg 

the  matter. J  The  methods  of  the  employment  bureaus 
had  been  condemned  in  Parliament,  and  the  Chamber 
had  passed  a  bill  to  suppress  the  employment  bureaus 
with  idemnity  in  1901-2.  The  Senate,  however,  rejected 
it  in  February,  1902,  and  the  question  was  dropped  in- 
definitely. 

The  workingmen  of  the  food-producing  industries 
(alimentation}  were  particularly  interested  in  the  sup- 
pression of  the  employment  bureaus.  In  October,  1903, 
exasperated  by  the  fact  that  twenty-five  years  of  lobby- 
ing and  of  petitioning  had  produced  no  results,  they 
decided  to  take  the  matter  into  their  own  hands.  Oc- 
tober 29th,  a  "veritable  riot"  took  place  in  the  Bourse 
du  Travail  of  Paris,  the  police  used  their  arms,  and 
many  were  wounded  on  both  sides.2 

The  Confederal  Committee  decided  to  lend  its  help  to 
the  workingmen  in  the  struggle.  It  appointed  a  special 
committee  to  direct  the  movement.  The  plan  adopted 
was  to  carry  on  a  wide  agitation  for  some  time  and  then 
to  arrange  protest-meetings  on  the  same  day  in  all  in- 
dustrial centers  of  France.  December  5,  1903,  hundreds 
of  meetings  were  held  all  over  France,  at  which  the  same 
demand  was  made  that  the  employment  offices  be  abol- 
ished. The  meetings  were  arranged  with  the  help  of  the 
Bourses  du  Travail  which  appear  in  all  such  cases  as  the 
centers  of  agitation. 

November  5,  1903,  the  Chamber,  by  495  votes  against 
14,  voted  a  law  suppressing  the  Employment  Bureaus 
within  a  period  of  five  years,  with  an  indemnity  of  six 
million  francs.  In  February,  1904,  the  law  passed  the 
vSenate  with  some  modifications. 

'Senator  Paul  Straus  in  La  Grande  Revue  (Feb.,  1914),  pp.  320  et 
seq. 

"-Journal  des  Dcbats  (Nov.  6.  1903),  p.  805. 


170  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [400 

The  agitation  for  the  suppression  of  the  employment 
bureaus  appeared  to  all  as  a  manifestation  of  the  new 
theories  on  "Direct  Action."  "The  socialist  syndicats 
have  wrested  the  vote  of  the  Chamber  by  the  pressure 
of  rebellion  {Coup  d"6meutes)"  wrote  the  Journal  des 
Economistes*  The  revolutionary  syndicalists  themselves 
considered  the  agitation  as  an  illustration  of  their  meth- 
ods, and  the  success  obtained  as  a  proof  of  the  efficiency 
of  the  latter.  The  report  to  the  Congress  of  Bourges 
(1904)  read : 

Under  the  pressure  of  the  workingmen  the  Government,  till 
then  refractory  to  the  reform,  capitulated.  .  .  .  To-day  it  is 
an  accomplished  fact;  wherever  syndicalist  action  was  exer- 
cised with  perseverance  and  energy,  the  employment  bureaus 
have  gone.  This  fact  is  characteristic.  The  General  Con- 
federation has  the  merit,  thanks  to  the  immense  effort  of  the 
interested  themselves,  of  having  obtained  a  reform  in  a  rela- 
tively short  time,  if  it  is  compared  with  the  slowness  with 
which  everything  concerning  the  workingmen  is  done.2 

The  policy  of  the  General  Confederation,  however,  had 
opponents  within  the  Confederation  itself.  A  struggle 
for  supremacy  between  the  two  tendencies  was  inevitable, 
and  it  took  place  at  the  very  next  Congress  of  the  Con- 
federation at  Bourges  (1904). 

The  report  presented  to  the  Congress  of  Bourges 
showed  that  the  Confederation  had  made  considerable 
progress  since  1902.  It  counted  now  53  Federations  of 
industries  and  trades,  and  National  syndicats  (against  30 
in  1902),  15  isolated  syndicats,  and  no  Bourses  du  Tra- 
vail, a  total  of  1,792  syndicats  (against  1,043  m  I9°2)> 

1  Journal  des  Economistes  (November,  1903),  p.  315. 

2  XIV  CongrZs  National  Corporatif  (Bourges,  1904),  p.  8. 


40 1  ]   THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR    171 

with  150,000  members.  The  Section  of  Federations  of 
industries  had  received  in  dues  for  the  two  years,  11,076 
francs;  its  total  budget  amounted  to  17,882  francs;  the 
Section  of  Bourses  du  Travail  had  collected  in  dues 
9,016  francs  and  had  a  total  budget  of  12,213  francs. 
The  Voix  du  Peuple  was  now  self-supporting,  and  had 
increased  the  number  of  its  subscriptions.  The  Con- 
gress of  Bourges,  for  the  first  time,  was  organized  on 
the  financial  resources  of  the  syndicats  without  municipal 
or  governmental  subsidies. 

It  was  known  before  that  the  Congress  of  Bourges 
would  discuss  the  question  of  methods,  and  both  sides, 
the  revolutionary  syndicalists  and  those  who  were  called 
"reformists,"  made  all  efforts  possible  to  obtain  a  ma- 
jority at  the  Congress.  There  were  1,178  mandates 
from  as  many  syndicats.  This  was  the  system  of  repre- 
sentation adopted  by  the  Statutes  of  the  Confederation 
in  1902.  At  its  Congress  the  Confederation  resolves 
itself  into  an  association  of  syndicats;  the  Federations 
and  Bourses  disappear  and  their  constituent  elements, 
the  syndicats,  take  their  place.  Each  syndicat — no  mat- 
ter how  large  or  how  small — has  one  vote;  and  one  dele- 
gate may  represent  as  many  as  ten  syndicats.  At  the 
Congress  of  Bourges  the  1,178  mandates  were  dis- 
tributed among  400  delegates,  of  whom  350  came  from 
the  Provinces  and  50  from  Paris. 

The  attack  on  the  Confederal  Committee  was  led  by 
M.  Keufer,  the  delegate  and  secretary  of  the  Typograph- 
ical Union  (La  Federation  du  Livre) .  He  accused  the 
Confederal  Committee  of  violating  the  statutes,  of  being 
partial  and  biased  and  of  trying  in  every  way  to  harm 
the  Federation  du  Livre,  because  the  latter  pursued 
"reformist"  methods.  "Yes,"  said  M.  Keufer,  "we 
prefer  the  reformist  method,  because  we  believe  that 


172  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [402 

direct  and  violent  action,  commended  by  the  anarchists, 
will  cost  thousands  of  workingmen  their  lives,  without 
assuring  durable  results." x  He  insisted  that  it  was 
necessary  to  try"  conciliatory  methods  before  declaring 
strikes  and  to  solicit  the  help  of  representatives  in  the 
legislative  bodies.  He  showed  that,  on  the  one  hand, 
even  the  revolutionary  syndicalists  were  compelled  by 
circumstances  to  use  such  methods,  while  the  Federation 
du  Livre,  on  the  other  hand,  did  not  shrink  from  strikes 
and  from  direct  action,  when  that  was  inevitable.  M. 
Keufer  was  supported  by  M.  Lauche,  the  delegate  of  the 
machinists,  and  by  M.  Guerard,  the  delegate  of  the  rail- 
way workers. 

The  accusations  of  the  "reformists"  were  repudiated 
by  a  number  of  revolutionary  syndicalists  who  reaffirmed 
in  their  speeches  adherence  to  the  ideas,  described  in  the 
preceding  chapters,  on  the  State,  on  direct  action,  etc. 
They  were  the  victors,  and  the  report  of  the  Confederal 
Committee  was  approved  by  812  votes  against  361  and 
ii  blank. 

The  main  struggle,  however,  centered  on  the  question 
of  proportional  representation.  This  question  had  been 
brought  up  at  previous  Congresses  by  the  delegates  of 
some  larger  syndicats.  At  one  time  even  some  of  the 
revolutionary  syndicalists  had  advocated  proportional 
representation  as  a  means  of  finding  out  the  real  strength 
of  the  various  tendencies  in  the  Confederation.  But 
after  the  Confederation  became  decidedly  revolutionary, 
the  revolutionary  syndicalists  became  decidedly  opposed 
to  proportional  representation  which  they  now  regarded 
as  a  move  on  the  part  of  the  "  reformist "  element  to 
obtain  control  of  the  Confederation.2 

1  XIV  Congrts  Corporatif  (Bourges,  1904),  pp.  95-6. 
* Mouvement  Socialiste  (Nov.,  1904),  p.  61. 


403]       THE  GENERAL  COX  FEDERATION  OF  LABOR         173 

Proportional  representation  was  defended  by  the  dele- 
gates of  the  Typographical  Union,  of  the  Machinists  and 
of  the  Railway  Workers.  They  criticised  the  statutes 
adopted  at  Montpellier  which  gave  every  organization, 
regardless  of  its  numbers,  one  vote  only  in  the  Confed- 
eral  Committee.  This  system,  they  declared,  vitiated 
the  character  of  the  Confederation,  and  gave  predomi- 
nance to  the  minority.  They  claimed  that  the  delegates 
in  the  Confederal  Committee  expressed  the  opinions 
shared  by  a  small  proportion  only  of  the  organized 
workingmen  and  that  the  Confederation  was,  therefore, 
a  tool  in  the  hands  of  a  few  "  turbulent "  individuals. 
They  demanded  that  some  system  of  proportional  repre- 
sentation should  be  adopted  which  should  give  every 
organization  a  number  of  votes  in  the  Confederal  Com- 
mittee proportional  to  the  number  of  its  members. 

The  opponents  of  proportional  representation  argued 
that  this  system  would  stifle  the  small  syndicats  ;  that  all 
syndicats  were  of  equal  value  from  the  point  of  view  of 
the  economic  struggle,  because  small  syndicats  often 
achieve  as  much,  and  even  more,  than  large  ones ;  they 
pointed  out  that  proportional  representation  would  make 
necessary  continual  changes  in  the  number  of  delegates 
in  the  Confederal  Committee,  because  the  effective  force 
of  the  syndicats  is  in  constant  flux  and  that  it  would  be 
impossible  to  find  out  the  true  figures.  They  claimed 
that  proportional  representation  could  not  be  applied  to 
economic  life,  because  it  was  no  fault  of  any  one  trade  or 
industry  if  only  a  few  thousand  workers  were  employed  in 
it,  while  other  industries  required  hundreds  of  thousands 
of  workingmen.  Even  from  the  point  of  view  of  strength, 
they  argued,  a  small  syndicat  may  have  more  value  than 
a  large  one  because  it  may  embrace  a  larger  proportion 
of  workingmen  employed  in  the  trade.  The  opponents 


THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [404 

of  proportional  representation  repudiated  the  assertion 
that  only  the  small  syndicats  were  with  them  and  pointed 
out  that  some  of  the  largest  federations,  as  the  Metal- 
lurgical Federation  with  11,500  members,  the  Fed- 
eration of  Marine  with  12,000  members  and  others,  were 
against  proportional  representation. 

The  opponents  of  proportional  representation  carried 
the  day  and  the  proposition  of  "  reformist "  delegates 
was  rejected  by  a  vote  of  822  against  388  (one  abstained). 

The  Congress  of  Bourges  thus  sanctioned  the  revolu- 
tionary character  of  the  Confederation.  The  "  reformists  " 
frankly  admitted  that  they  had  suffered  a  defeat  and  at- 
tributed it  to  the  fact  that  two-thirds  of  the  delegates  were 
new  men  in  the  movement  and  under  the  influence  of  the 
anarchists. 1  The  revolutionary  syndicalists  triumphed, 
and  extolled  the  historical  significance  of  the  Congress 
of  Bourges  which,  in  their  opinion,  was  a  "  landmark  " 
in  the  history  of  syndicalism. 

The  Congress  of  Bourges  adopted  a  resolution  which 
Was  to  concentrate  the  attention  of  the  Confederation 
for  the  next  two  years  on  one  question:  an  eight-hour 
working  day.  The  Committee  appointed  by  the  Con- 
gress to  consider  the  question  reported  that  two  ways  of 
obtaining  an  eight-hour  day  had  been  indicated.  One 
proposed  to  prepare  a  bill  to  be  presented  to  the  public 
authorities  and  to  organize  public  meetings  in  order  to 
show  the  government  that  public  opinion  demanded  the 
passage  of  the  law.  This  method  was  rejected  by  the 
Committee  because  ever  since  1889,  workingmen  had 
presented  such  petitions  to  the  public  authorities  on  the 
first  of  May,  but  without  any  results  whatsoever. 

On  the  contrary,  the  other  "  direct "  method  which 

1  A.  Keufer,  Le  Mouvemcnt  Socialiste  (Nov.,  1904),  p.  93. 


405]   THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR 

recommended  the  workingmen  to  "hold  aloof"  from 
the  public  authorities,  and  to  exert  all  possible  pressure 
"on  their  adversaries"  was  adopted  by  the  Committee. 
The  Committee  argued  that  the  experience  with  the  em- 
ployment agencies  had  shown  that  this  method  gave 
better  results.  )  The  report  of  the  Committee  read: 

If  the  recent  campaign  has  resulted  in  the  suppression  of  the 
employment  bureaus,  it  is  because  the  movement  was  becom- 
ing" dangerous. 

Every  day  employment  bureaus  were  abolished,  anonymous 
violence  was  committed  against  the  owners  of  the  offices 
(placeurs),  a  considerable  number  of  shops  were  damaged, 
numerous  collisions  took  place  between  the  police  and  the 
workingmen,  Paris  was  in  a  state  of  siege,  and  it  was  in  order 
to  calm  this  agitation  that  Parliament  voted  a  law  making  it 
permissive  for  the  municipalities  to  abolish  the  employment 
bureaus.1 

/ 

'The  Committee,  therefore,  recommended  that  the 
same  method  be  used  to  obtain  an  eight-hour  day,  that 
big  manifestations  be  organized  all  over  France  on  the 
ist  of  May,  1905,  and  that  afterwards  an  active  propa- 
ganda be  carried  on  by  a  special  commission  appointed 
for  that  purpose  by  the  Confederal  Committee  "in  order 
that  beginning  with  the  ist  of  May,  1906,  no  working- 
man  should  consent  to  work  more  than  eight  hours  a 
day  nor  for  a  wage  below  the  minimum  established  by 
the  interested  organizations."  2  The  recommendation  of 
the  Committee  was  adopted  by  the  Congress  with  an 
amendment  of  Pouget  which  still  more  emphasized  the 
"direct"  method  to  be  used. 

1  XIV  CongrZs  Corporatif  (Bourges,  1904),  pp.  205-6. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  207. 


176  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [406 

To  carry  out  the  decisions  of  the  Congress,  the  Con- 
federal  Committee  appointed  a  special  commission  to 
direct  the  movement  for  an  eight-hour  day.  The  Com- 
mission sent  out  a  questionnaire  to  all  syndical  organi- 
zations, asking  all  those  who  were  in  favor  of  the  move- 
ment to  lend  their  help.  A  number  of  manifestoes, 
posters  and  pamphlets  were  published  and  spread  abroad 
in  tens  of  thousands  of  copies  in  which  the  meaning  of 
the  movement  and  its  importance  were  explained.  In 
the  trade-journals,  in  the  cars,  in  the  streets,  and  wher- 
ever possible,  brief  mottoes  were  posted,  such  as : 
"  Eight  hours  of  work  means  more  rest  and  more 
health,"  "To  work  more  than  eight  hours  means  to 
lower  your  wages,"'  etc.  On  the  Bourse  du  Travail  of 
Paris  a  big  placard  was  put  up  with  the  words:  "From 
the  first  of  May,  1906,  we  shall  not  work  more  than 
eight  hours."  Delegates  were  sent  out  on  repeated 
tours  into  the  province  to  carry  on  the  propaganda  and 
agitation.  On  the  first  of  May,  1905,  over  150  meetings 
were  arranged  in  different  parts  of  France  at  which  the 
question  of  the  eight-hour  day  was  considered. 

As  May  I,  1906,  neared,  the  agitation  in  the  country 
became  more  and  more  intense.  A  number  of  events 
helped  to  increase  the  agitation.  In  March,  1906,  a 
catastrophe  occurred  in  the  mining  districts  of  Northern 
France  which  resulted  in  the  loss  of  workingmen's  lives. 
A  strike  accompanied  by  violence  followed.  In  April, 
the  letter  carriers  of  Paris  struck,  causing  some  dis- 
organization in  the  service  for  a  few  days. 

Toward  the  end  of  April  the  number  of  strikes  and 
manifestations  increased  in  Paris.  The  agitation  was 
exploited  by  the  enemies  of  the  government  and  par- 
ticularly by  the  monarchist  papers.  The  Government  of 
M.  Clemenceau,  on  the  other  hand,  tried  to  discredit  the 


407]       THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR         177 

movement  by  spreading  rumors  that  a  plot  against  the 
Republic  had  been  discovered  in  which  monarchists  and 
leaders  of  the  Confederation  were  involved.  The  Voix 
du  Peuple  published  a  protest  of  the  Confederal  Com- 
mittee against  this  accusation.  Nevertheless  the  gov- 
ernment searched  at  the  same  time  the  houses  of  Mon- 
archists, Bonapartists  and  of  leading  members  of  the 
Confederation,  and  on  the  eve  of  the  first  of  May,  it 
arrested  Griffuelhes,  Pouget,  Merrheim  and  other  syndi- 
calists together  with  a  number  of  well-known  monarch- 
ists. 

The  first  of  May  found  Paris  in  a  state  of  siege. 
Premier  Clemenceau  had  collected  numerous  troops  in 
the  capital.  Since  the  days  of  the  Commune  Paris  had 
not  seen  so  many.  Among  the  bourgeoisie  a  real  panic 
reigned.  Many  left  Paris  and  crossed  the  Channel. 
Those  who  remained  in  Paris  made  provision  for  food 
for  days  to  come.  The  papers  spoke  of  the  "coming- 
revolution  "  which  the  General  Confederation  of  Labor 
was  to  let  loose  on  society.1 

The  strike  movement  was  very  wide.  According  to 
official  statistics,  the  agitation  of  the  Confederation 
affected  2,585  industrial  establishments  and  involved 
202,507  workingmen.  The  sweep  of  the  movement  may 
be  grasped  from  the  following  table  giving  the  statistics 
of  strikes  in  France  since  1892  : 

1  Journal  des  !)c!',ai*  (27  April.  1006).  p.  769. 


THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE 


[408 


Number  of 

Year 

strikes 

1892  

261 

1893  

634 

1894  

39i 

1895  

405 

1896  

476 

1897  

356 

1898  .... 

368 

1899  

740 

1900  

902 

1901  

523 

1902  

512 

1903  

567 

1904  

1  ,026 

1905  

830 

1906  

1,309 

1907  

1,275 

Number  of 
establishments 

500 
4,286 

1,731 

1,298 

2,178 

2,568 

1,967 

4,290 
10,253 

6,970 

1,820 

3,246 
17,250 

5,302 
19,637 

8,365 


Number  of 
zvorkingmen 

50,000 
170,123 

54,576 

45,801 

49,851 

68,875 

82,065 
176,826 
222,714 
111,414 
212,704 

123,151 
271,097 
177,666 
438,466 
197,961  * 


The  movement  assumed  various  forms  in  different 
trades.  The  printers,  for  instance,  pursued  their  con- 
ciliatory methods  and  obtained  a  nine-hour  day  in  about 
150  towns.  In  some  trades  the  strikes  developed  a  more 
or  less  acute  character  and  continued  for  several  months 
after  the  first  of  May. 

Some  of  the  "reformists"  declared  that  the  movement 
was  a  complete  failure.2  According  to  official  statistics,3 
the  results  of  the  strike  movement  were  as  follows: 


Demand 

Success 

Compromise 

Failure 

3 

.* 

tw 

Establish- 
ments 

Strikers 

t) 

M 

•n 
t/3 

Establish- 
ments 

Strikers 

!   j: 

!£  "• 

C              "o    C 

«B     11 

£  :« 

109,786 

17,023 
7,251 

2 

36 

4° 

5 
135 
582 

45 
2723 
7409 

13 
28 
16 

1,970 
994 
220 

25,520 
3°,75° 

2,000 

88    '   7,556 
45           755 

27    !     368 

lStatistique  des  Greves,  1893-1908. 

2 XV  Congres  National  Corporatif  (Amiens,  1906),  p.  103. 

3  Statistique  des  Greves,  1906,  pp.  774  et  seq. 


409]   THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR 

The  revolutionary  syndicalists  did  not  claim  much 
material  success,  but  they  argued  that  this  had  not  been 
expected.  The  main  purpose  of  the  movement,  they  as- 
serted, was,  "  by  an  immense  effort,  to  spread  among  the 
large  mass  of  workingmen  the  ideas  which  animate  the 
militant  groups  and  the  syndical  organizations.  The 
problem  to  be  solved,  at  first,  was,  thus,  by  means  of  a 
vigorous  propaganda  to  reach  the  workingmen  who  had 
remained  indifferent  to  the  syndicalist  movement."1 
And  this  task,  in  the  opinion  of  the  revolutionary  syndi- 
calists, had  been  accomplished.  The  agitation  had 
aroused  the  workingmen  in  all  parts  of  France.  ; 

In  September,  1906,  the  Congress  of  the  Confedera- 
tion met  at  Amiens.  The  report  of  the  secretary  showed 
continued  progress  of  the  Confederation  since  1904. 
The  Section  of  Federations  of  industries  now  counted  61 
federal  organizations  with  2,399  syndicats  and  203,273 
members.  The  dues  collected  by  this  section  for  the 
two  years  amounted  to  17,650  francs:  and  its  total 
budget  to  20,586  francs.  The  section  of  the  Federation 
of  Bourses  consisted  now  of  135  Bourses  with  1,609 
syndicats;  it  collected  in  dues  11,821  francs,  and  had  a 
total  budget  of  15,566  francs. 

The  report  of  the  Confederal  Committee  again  called 
forth  the  attacks  of  "  reformist "  syndicalists,  but  was 
approved  by  781  votes  against  115  (21  blank  and  10 
contested).  But  the  main  question  which  absorbed  the 
largest  part  of  the  work  of  the  Congress  was  the  rela- 
tion of  the  General  Confederation  of  Labor  to  the 
Socialist  Party. 

This  question  had  again  assumed  a  new  character.  The 
International  Socialist  Congress  of  Amsterdam  (1904) 

1  XV  Congr&s  Corporatif  (Amiens,  1906),  p.  3. 


THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [410 

had  exhorted  and  advised  the  French  Socialists  to  ac- 
complish as  soon  as  possible  the  unification  of  their  sep- 
arate parties  into  one  national  Socialist  Party.  In  April, 
1905,  a  "Congress  of  Unification"  was  held  at  Paris,  at 
which  the  Parti  Socialiste  de  France  and  the  Parti  Soci- 
aliste  Frangais  formed  the  Parti  Socialiste  Unifie.  A 
common  program  was  accepted  and  a  new  form  of  organ- 
ization elaborated.  At  its  first  Congress  in  Chalons  in 
October,  1905,  the  Unified  Party  counted  35,000  paying 
members  distributed  in  2,000  groups,  67  federations  and 
77  departments.  In  the  elections  of  1906  the  Unified 
Party  obtained  an  increase  of  votes  and  elected  54  mem- 
bers to  Parliament. 

It  now  seemed  to  many  that  there  was  no  reason  for 
the  General  Confederation  of  Labor  to  keep  aloof  from 
the  Socialist  Party.  The  reason  heretofore  given  was 
that  the  divisions  in  the  Socialist  Party  disorganized  the 
syndicats,  but  since  the  Socialist  Party  was  now  unified, 
the  reason  lost  all  significance,  and  it  seemed  possible  to 
establish  some  form  of  union  between  the  two  organiza- 
tions. The  question  was  taken  up  soon  after  the  unifica- 
tion of  tbe  Socialist  Party  by  the  "  Federation  of  Textile 
Workers "  who  had  it  inserted  in  the  program  of  the 
coming  Congress  of  Amiens.  The  question  was  discussed 
for  some  time  before  the  Congress  in  the  socialist  and 
syndicalist  press,  and  the  decision  that  would  be  taken 
could  have  been  foreseen  from  the  discussion. 

M.  Renard,  the  Secretary  of  the  "  Federation  of  Tex- 
tile Workers,"  defended  the  proposition  that  permanent 
relations  should  be  established  between  the  General  Con- 
federation and  the  Unified  Socialist  Party.  His  argu- 
ment was  that  in  the  struggle  of  the  working-class  for 
emancipation,  various  methods  must  be  used,  and  that 
various  forms  of  organization  were  accordingly  neces- 


4i  i  ]       THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR         igl 

sary.  The  syndicat,  in  his  opinion,  could  not  suffice  for 
all  purposes;  it  was  an  instrument  in  economic  struggles 
against  employers,  but  by  the  side  of  this  economic 
action,  political  action  must  be  carried  on  to  obtain  pro- 
tective labor  legislation.  For  this  purpose  he  considered 
it  necessary  to  maintain  relations  with  the  Socialist 
Party,  which  had  '"  always  proposed  and  voted  laws  hav- 
ing for  their  object  the  amelioration  of  the  conditions  of 
the  working-class  as  well  as  their  definitive  emancipa- 
tion."1 Besides,  argued  M.  Renard,  "if  a  revolutionary 
situation  should  be  created  to-day,"  the  syndicats  now  in 
existence,  with  their  present  organization  could  not  "  reg- 
ulate production  and  organize  exchange,"  and  "would 
be  compelled  to  make  use  of  the  machinery  of  the  gov- 
ernment." The  co-operation  of  the  Confederation  with 
the  Socialist  Party,  therefore,  was  useful  and  necessary 
from  the  point  of  view  both  of  the  present  and  of  the 
future. 

M.  Renard  repudiated  the  accusation  that  he  meant  to 
introduce  politics  into  the  syndicats  or  to  fuse  the  latter 
in  the  Socialist  Party.  On  the  contrary,  he  accused  the 
Confederal  Committee  of  carrying  on  political  agitation 
under  the  cover  of  neutrality.  Against  this  "  special 
politics"  his  proposition  was  directed.  "When  anti- 
militarism  is  carried  on,"  said  M.  Renard,  "  when  anti- 
patriotism  is  indulged  in,  when  [electoral]  abstention  is 
preached,  it  is  politics."  This  anarchistic  policy  has 
prevailed  since  the  "libertarians  have  invaded  the  Con- 
federation and  have  transformed  the  latter  into  a  war- 
engine  against  the  Socialist  Party.  The  Federation  of 
Textile  Workers  wants  to  put  an  end  to  the  present  state 
of  affairs."  3 

1  Xy  Congrts  Corporatif  (Amiens,  1906),  pp.  135-6. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  134.  *Ibid.,  p.  165. 


1 82  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [412 

The  proposition  of  the  Textile  workers  was  combated 
by  revolutionary  and  "  reformist  "  syndicalists  alike.  M. 
Keufer,  who  had  bitterly  attacked  the  revolutionary  syn- 
dicalists at  Bourges  (1904),  now  fought  the  political 
syndicalists.  He  agreed  with  M.  Renard  that  political 
action  was  necessary  though  he  did  not  place  "too  great 
hopes  in  legislative  action  and  in  the  intervention  of  the 
State;  "  still  he  thought  that  the  latter  was  inevitable, 
and  alluded  to  the  fact  that  the  revolutionary  syndicalists 
themselves  were  constantly  soliciting  the  intervention  of 
the  public  authorities.  But  to  secure  a  successful  parallel 
economic  and  political  action,  M.  Keufer  believed  that  it 
was  better  for  the  Confederation  to  remain  entirely  inde- 
pendent of  the  Socialist  Party,  and  he  proposed  a  reso- 
lution repudiating  both  "  anarchist  and  anti-parlia- 
mentarian agitation"  and  permanent  relations  with  any 
political  party.1 

The  revolutionary  syndicalists  in  their  turn  criticised 
the  part  assigned  to  the  syndicat  both  by  the  political 
syndicalists  and  by  the  "  reformists."  They  emphasized 
the  "integral"  and  revolutionary  role  of  the  syndicat 
which  makes  it  unnecessary  and  dangerous  to  conclude 
any  alliance  with  any  political  party.  They  denied  that 
the  Confederal  Committee  was  carrying  on  an  anarchist 
propaganda.  Said  M.  Griffuelhes  : 

Keufer  insists  very  much  on  the  presence  of  libertarians  in  the 
Confederal  Committee ;  they  are  not  so  numerous  as  the 
legend  has  it ;  this  is  only  a  stratagem  to  arouse  the  fear  of 
an  anarchist  peril  which  does  not  exist.  On  the  contrary,  the 
vitality  of  the  Confederation  is  the  result  of  a  cooperation  of 
various  political  elements.  When,  after  the  entrance  of  M. 

1 XIV  Congrts  Corporatif  (Amiens,  1906),  pp.  154-157. 


4i  3J       THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR         183 

Millerand  into  the  government,  the  latter  began  its  policy  of 
"  domesticating"  the  workingmen,  a  coalition  of  Anarchists, 
Guesdists,  Blanquists,  Allemanists  and  other  elements  took 
place  in  order  to  isolate  the  government  from  the  syndicats. 
This  coalition  has  maintained  itself  and  has  been  the  very  life 
of  the  Confederation.1 

The  proposition  of  the  Textile  Federation  was  re- 
jected by  724  votes  against  34  (37  blank).  The  defeat 
for  the  political  syndicalists  was  complete.  By  an  over- 
whelming majority  of  830  against  8  (one  blank),  the 
Congress  adopted  the  following  proposition  of  Griffuel- 
hes  : 

The  Confederal  Congress  of  Amiens  confirms  article  2  of 
the  constitution  of  the  General  Federation. 

The  C.  G.  T.  groups,  independent  of  all  political  schools, 
all  the  workingmen  who  are  conscious  of  the  struggle  to  be 
carried  on  for  the  disappearance  of  the  wage  system.  .  .  . 

The  Congress  considers  that  this  declaration  is  a  recogni- 
tion of  the  class  struggle  which,  on  an  economic  basis,  places 
the  workingmen  in  revolt  against  all  forms  of  exploitation 
and  oppression,  material  and  moral,  put  into  operation  by  the 
capitalist  class  against  the  working  class. 

The  Congress  makes  this  theoretic  affirmation  more  precise 
by  adding  the  following  points  : 

With  regard  to  the  every-day  demands,  syndicalism  pur- 
sues the  coordination  of  the  efforts  of  the  workingmen,  the 
increase  of  the  workingmen's  welfare  through  the  realization 
of  immediate  ameliorations,  such  as  the  diminution  of  work- 
ing hours,  the  increase  of  wages,  etc. 

But  this  is  only  one  aspect  of  its  work  ;  syndicalism  is  pre- 
paring the  integral  emancipation  which  can  be  realized  only 
by  the  expropriation  of  the  capitalist  class ;  it  commends  as  a 
means  to  this  end  the  general  strike,  and  considers  that  the 

1  XI'  Cotigrh  Corf>oratif  (Amiens,   1906).  p.  167. 


1 84  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE 

syndicat,  now  a  group  of  resistance,  will  be  in  the  future  the 
group  of  production  and  of  distribution,  the  basis  of  social 
organization. 

The  Congress  declares  that  this  double  task  of  every-day 
life  and  of  the  future  follows  from  the  very  situation  of  the 
wage-earners,  which  exerts  its  pressure  upon  the  working-class 
and  which  makes  it  a  duty  for  all  workingmen,  whatever  their 
opinions  or  their  political  and  philosophical  tendencies,  to  be- 
long to  the  essential  group  which  is  the  syndicat ;  consequently, 
so  far  as  individuals  are  concerned,  the  Congress  declares  en- 
tire liberty  for  every  syndicalist  to  participate,  outside  of  the 
trade  organization,  in  any  forms  of  struggle  which  correspond 
to  his  philosophical  or  political  ideas,  confining  itself  only  to 
asking  of  him,  in  return,  not  to  introduce  into  the  syndicat 
the  opinions  which  he  professes  outside  of  it. 

In  so  far  as  organizations  are  concerned,  the  Congress  de- 
cides that,  in  order  that  syndicalism  may  attain  its  maximum 
effectiveness,  economic  action  should  be  exercised  directly 
against  the  class  of  employers,  and  the  Confederal  organiza- 
tions must  not,  as  syndical  groups,  pay  any  attention  to  parties 
and  sects  which,  outside  and  by  their  side,  may  pursue  in  full 
liberty  the  transformation  of  society. 

The  vote  on  this  resolution  showed  that  all  parties  inter- 
preted the  resolution  in  their  own  way.  To  the  "  reform- 
ists "  it  meant  complete  political  neutrality,  to  the  politi- 
cal syndicalist  it  emphasized  the  liberty  of  political  action 
outside  the  syndicat ;  the  revolutionary  syndicats  saw  in 
the  resolution  the  "  Charter  of  French  Syndicalism  "  in 
which  their  theories  were  succinctly  formulated,  j 

After  the  Congress  of  Amiens  the  General  Confedera- 
tion continued  its  policy  of  direct  action.  During  1907 
it  helped  the  movement  fora  law  on  a  weekly  rest  (Repos 
Hebdamodaire)  which  was  carried  on  by  the  commercial 
employees  and  by  workingmen  of  certain  trades.  The 
movement  expressed  itself  often  in  street  demonstrations 


415]       THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR         jgg 

and  riotous  gatherings  and  brought  the  Confederation 
into  conflict  with  the  government. 

The  government  of  M.  Clemenceau  took  a  determined 
attitude  towards  the  Confederation.  Papers  like  the 
Temps  called  upon  the  government  to  dissolve  the  Con- 
federation. "Against  syndicalism,"  wrote  the  Temps, 
"  are  valid  all  the  arguments  of  law  and  of  fact  as  against 
anarchy."  Members  of  the  Confederal  Committee  were 
arrested  here  and  there  for  incendiary  speeches  and  for 
anti-militaristic  propaganda.  In  the  Chamber  of  Depu- 
ties the  Confederation  was  the  subject  of  a  heated  debate 
which  lasted  several  days,  and  in  which  radicals,  con- 
servatives, socialists,  and  members  of  the  government 
took  part. 

The  Confederal  Committee  in  its  turn  vehemently  at- 
tacked the  government.  In  June,  1907,  troubles  occurred 
among  the  wine-growers  in  the  south  of  France,  and 
blood  was  shed.  The  Confederal  Committee  launched  a 
manifesto  against  the  government  with  the  heading, 
"Government  of  Assassins,"  in  which  it  praised  one  of 
the  regiments  that  had  refused  to  shoot  into  the  crowd 
at  the  order  of  the  officers. 

The  government  instituted  legal  proceedings  against 
twelve  members  of  the  Confederal  Committee  for  "  in- 
sults to  the  army."  The  trial  took  place  in  February, 
1908;  all  the  accused  were  acquitted. 

In  June,  1908,  a  strike  in  one  of  the  towns  near  Paris, 
Draveuil,  occasioned  the  intervention  of  the  police. 
Shooting  took  place,  one  workingman  was  killed,  one 
mortally  wounded,  and  several  others  severely  wounded. 
On  the  4th  of  June  the  Confederal  Committee  published 
a  protest  calling  the  government  "  a  government  of 
assassins"  and  Premier  Clemenceau,  "Clemenceau  the 
murderer"  (Clemenceau  le  Tueiir)  and  called  upon  the 


!86  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE 

syndicats  to  protest  against  the  action  of  the  govern- 
ment. As  the  strike  in  Draveuil  was  among  working- 
men  of  the  building  trades,  the  "  Federation  of  the  Build- 
ing Trades,"  the  most  revolutionary  syndical  organization 
in  France,  took  the  lead  in  the  movement,  seconded  by 
the  Confederal  Committee.  Manifestations  took  place 
at  the  funerals  of  the  killed  workingmen  in  Draveuil  and 
Villeneuve  St.  George  (neighboring  communes)  in  which 
bloody  collisions  with  the  police  were  avoided  with  diffi- 
culty. The  "  Federation  of  the  Building  Trades "  and 
many  members  of  the  Confederal  Committee  advocated 
a  general  strike  as  a  protest  against  the  action  of  the 
government. 

Meanwhile  the  strike  at  Draveuil  was  going  on.  On 
the  27th  of  July  a  collision  between  the  police  and  the 
strikers  again  took  place,  and  the  "  Federation  of  Build- 
ing Trades "  decided  upon  a  general  strike  and  upon  a 
demonstration  for  the  3Oth  of  July.  Some  members  of 
the  Confederal  Committee,  the  Secretary  Griffuelhes,  for 
instance,  were  opposed  to  the  manifestation,  but  the 
decision  was  taken  against  their  advice. 

The  manifestation  of  Villeneuve  St.  George  resulted  in 
a  violent  collision  ;  there  were  many  killed  and  wounded. 
The  agitation  grew,  and  the  Confederal  Committee  to- 
gether with  the  federal  committee  of  the  Building  Trades 
called  upon  the  other  trades  to  join  them  in  a  general 
strike  to  be  continued  as  a  protest  against  the  "  mas- 
sacres." The  call  of  the  Confederal  Committee  was  only 
partly  followed. 

The  events  of  Villeneuve  St.  George  aroused  the  press 
and  the  government  against  the  Confederation.  The 
"  Confederal  Committee,"  wrote  the  Temps,  "  is  not  an 
instrument  for  trade  conquests.  It  is  a  purely  insurrec- 
tional Committee.  It  should  be  treated  as  such."  The 


417]       THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR         187 

government  arrested  all  the  leading  members  of  the 
Confederal  Committee. 

On  the  4th  of  August,  as  a  move  against  the  govern- 
ment, the  Confederal  Committee  which  constituted  itself 
after  the  arrests  and  of  which  M.  Luquet  was  temporary 
secretary,  admitted  the  Federation  of  Miners  with  60,000 
members  into  the  Confederation.  The  Federation  of 
Miners  had  for  some  time  expressed  its  wish  to  enter  the 
Confederation,  but  certain  difficulties,  more  or  less  per- 
sonal, had  stood  in  the  way.  After  Villeneuve  St. 
George  these  difficulties  were  smoothed  and  the  adher- 
ence of  the  Miners  to  the  Confederation  was  made  pos- 
sible. 

The  events  of  Villeneuve  St.  George  aroused  some 
protests  within  the  Confederation.  The  collisions  and 
the  bloodshed  were  ascribed  by  the  opponents  of  the 
Confederal  Committee  to  revolutionary  methods  and 
"anarchist"  tactics.  The  polemics  between  the  "re- 
formist" and  "revolutionary"  elements  which  had  not 
ceased  since  the  Congress  of  Amiens  now  became  more 
and  more  bitter. 

In  September,  1908,  the  Congress  of  the  Confedera- 
tion met  at  Marseilles.  The  reports  to  the  Congress 
showed  that  the  Section  of  Federations  of  industries 
counted  68  federal  organizations  with  2,586  syndicats 
and  294,398  members  ;  total  receipts  amounted  to  24,- 
719  francs.  The  Section  of  Bourses  counted  157  bourses 
du  Travail  with  2,028  syndicats  and  with  a  budget  of 
16.081  francs. 

The  Congress  of  Marseilles  expressed  its  sympathy 
with  the  arrested  members  of  the  Confederation,  and 
"  denounced  before  the  entire  public  the  abominable  pro- 
cedures "  of  the  government,  The  reports  of  the  Con- 
federal  Committee  were  approved  by  947  with  none 


jgg  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE 

against  and  109  blanks,  "  not  because  the  members  of 
the  Confederal  Bureau  were  arrested,  but  because  the 
acts  of  the  Bureau  and  of  the  Confederal  Committee 
were  the  expression  of  the  mandate  entrusted  to  them." 

The  Congress  of  Marseilles  rejected  the  proposition  to 
apply  the  principle  of  proportional  representation  which 
was  again  advanced.  It  discussed  the  question  of  indus- 
trial and  trade  unionism  and  decided  in  favor  of  the 
former,  inviting  all  trade  federations  to  fuse  into  indus- 
trial federations. 

But  the  main  question  which  agitated  the  Congress 
was  that  of  anti-militarism.  At  Amiens  (1906)  an  anti- 
militaristic resolution  introduced  by  Yvetot  (Secretary 
of  the  Section  of  Bourses  du  Travail]  had  been  passed. 
But  it  was  passed  in  a  hurry,  as  there  was  no  time  to 
discuss  it,  and  it  raised  strong  opposition  among  the 
"  reformist "  elements.  It  was  taken  to  the  Congress  of 
Marseilles,  therefore,  for  another  discussion. 

The  Congress  of  Marseilles  accepted  the  resolution 
introduced  by  Yvetot.  The  resolution  read  : 

The  Congress  of  Marseilles,  repeats  and  renders  more  pre- 
cise the  decision  of  Amiens,  namely: 

Considering  that  the  army  tends  more  and  more  to  take 
the  place  of  the  workingmen  on  strike  in  the  factory,  in  the 
fields,  in  the  workshop,  when  it  has  not  the  function  of  shoot- 
ing them,  as  in  Narbonnes,  Raon-L'Etape,  and  Villeneuve 
St.  George ; 

Considering  that  the  exercise  of  the  right  to  strike  will  be 
only  a  fraud  as  long  as  the  soldiers  agree  to  substitute  the 
workers  in  civil  work  and  to  massacre  the  workingmen  ;  the 
Congress,  keeping  within  purely  economic  limits,  recommends 
the  instruction  of  the  recruits  (j'eunes]  in  order  that  on  the 
day  when  they  put  on  the  military  uniform  they  should  be 
convinced  that  they  should  remain  nevertheless  members  of 


419]       THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR         jSg 

the  family  of  working-men  and  that  in  the  conflict  between 
capital  and  labor  their  duty  is  not  to  use  their  arms  against 
their  brethren,  the  working-men  ; 

!  Considering  that  the  geographical  boundaries  are  modifi- 
able at  the  will  of  the  possessors,  the  workingmen  recognize 
only  the  economic  boundaries  separating  the  two  class-enemies 
—the  working  class  and  the  capitalist  class. 
The   Congress  repeats  the   formula  of   the   International  : 

'  The  workingmen  have  no  fatherland  ;  "  and  adds  : 

That  whereas,  consequently,  every  war  is  but  an  outrage 
(attentat)  against  the  workingmen  ;  that  it  is  a  bloody  and 
terrible  means  of  diverting  them  from  their  demands,  the 
Congress  declares  it  necessary,  from  the  international  point  of 
view,  to  enlighten  the  workingmen,  in  order  that  in  case  of 
war  they  may  reply  to  the  declaration  of  war  by  a  declaration 
of  a  revolutionary  general  strike.1 

The  resolution  was  adopted  by  681  votes  against  421 
and  43  blank.  Many  voted  against  the  resolution  be- 
cause of  its  anti-patriotic  character,  though  they  accepted 
the  part  bearing  upon  the  use  of  the  army  in  strikes.^ 

In  November,  1909,  the  government  freed  the  arrested 
members  of  the  Confederal  Committee,  but  they  did  not 
regain  their  former  positions  of  authority.  In  February, 
1909,  the  "reformist"  elements  succeeded  in  electing  as 
secretary  of  the  Confederation  their  candidate,  M.  Niel, 
who  was  once  a  revolutionary  but  had  become  more 
moderate.  M.  Niel  was  elected  by  a  majority  of  one 
vote,  and  his  position  was  very  difficult  in  the  Confed- 
eral Committee.  He  aimed,  as  he  expressed  it,  to  bring 
about  ''moral  unity"  in  the  Confederation,  but  was 
hampered  in  his  activities  by  the  revolutionaries  and  not 
sufficiently  supported  by  the  "reformists." 

In   March,   1909,  the   Post   Office  employees  went  on 

1  XVI  CongrSs  National  Corporate f,  p.  213. 


1 9o  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [420 

strike.  The  Confederation  took  no  part  in  the  move- 
ment but  invited  the  workingmen  to  sympathize  with 
the  strikers.  The  strike  was  successful,  and  the  govern- 
ment promised  to  consider  the  grievances  of  the  Post 
Offie  employees  whose  main  demand  was  the  removal  of 
the  Secretary  of  the  Department. 

The  promises  of  the  government  were  unofficial,  and  the 
strikers  after  some  time  claimed  that  the  government  had 
not  kept  its  word.  A  second  strike  followed  in  May,  but 
there  was  less  enthusiasm  among  the  employees,  and  a 
failure  was  inevitable.  The  leaders  of  the  strike  appealed 
to  the  Confederation  for  help.  The  Confederal  Commit- 
tee invited  the  workingmen  of  Paris  to  go  out  on  a  general 
strike,  but  the  invitation  of  the  Confederation  found 
very  little  response,  and  the  Post  Office  employees  re- 
turned to  work. 

The  failure  was  ascribed  to  the  "reformists",  M.  Guer- 
ard, z  secretary  of  the  Railway  Workers,  and  to  M.  Niel, 
who  had  delivered  a  speech  on  the  eve  of  the  general 
strike  declaring  that  the  miners  were  not  ready  for  it. 
This  speech,  the  revolutionaries  alleged,  produced  an  im- 
pression disastrous  for  the  general  strike.  The  bitter 
criticism  of  the  revolutionists  forced  Niel  to  resign  on 
May  28,  1909.  The  election  of  Jouhaux  secured  the 
triumph  of  the  revolutionary  syndicalists  once  more. 

The  dissensions  between  "  reformists  "  and  revolution- 
aries "  became  still  more  acute  after  the  resignation  of 
M.  Niel.  The  rumor  that  the  "  reformist  "  syndicats 
would  leave  the  Confederation  circulated  more  persis- 
tently than  before  The  "  reformists  "  formed  in  July,  1909, 
a  Comite  d'  Union  Syndicaliste  to  react  against  the  anarch- 
istic syndicalism,  to  realize  the  union  of  workingmen, 

1  M.  Guerard,  once  revolutionary,  had  become  moderate. 


42 1  ]   THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR 

independent  of  all  politics,  in  the  exclusively  economic 
and  industrial  domain. T  The  situation  was  considered 
very  critical  by  both  friends  and  enemies  of  the  Confed- 
eration. 

The  struggle  of  tendencies  and  personalities  within  the 
Confederation  came  to  a  climax  at  the  next  congress 
held  at  Toulouse  from  Oct.  3  to  Oct.  10,  1910.  The 
greater  part  of  the  time  of  the  congress  was  consumed 
in  discussing  the  resignation  of  Niel,  the  accusations 
against  the  former  secretary  Griffuelhes,  and  the  quar- 
rels of  ''reformists"  and  revolutionists  generally.  Both 
sides  were  disgusted  with  the  proceedings,  but  hoped 
that  the  atmosphere  of  mutual  hostility  and  distrust 
would  be  cleared  thereby,  and  that  a  new  period  of  har- 
monious action  would  be  the  result. 

The  Congress  was  hardly  over,  when  a  strike  unex- 
pectedly broke  out  among  the  railway  men  of  the  Paris- 
Nord.  The  National  Syndicat  of  Railway  workers  had 
been  considering  the  advisability  of  a  general  strike  for 
some  time,  but  was  postponing  action  in  the  hope  of 
effecting  a  peaceful  settlement.  The  Syndicat  of  railway 
workers  was  among  the  so-called  "reformist"  syndicats, 
and  its  leaders  laid  great  stress  on  peaceful  negotiations 
with  employers  and  on  soliciting  the  cooperation  of  the 
government.  The  demands  of  the  railway  men  were : 
an  increase  in  wages,  one  day  of  rest  in  the  week,  the 
retroactive  application  of  the  old-age  pension  law  passed 
in  1909,  and  several  other  concessions  relating  to  con- 
ditions of  work  and  matters  of  discipline.  The  railway 
companies  had  refused  to  meet  the  representatives  of 
the  railway  men,  and  M.  Briand,  who  was  Premier  at  the 
time,  advised  the  officials  of  the  railway  union  that  he 

1  G.  Weill,  Ifistoirc  da  i\Iaitvcincnt  Social  du  France,  386. 


1 92  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [422 

could  do  nothing  to  make  the  railway  companies  change 
their  attitude.  The  leaders  cf  the  syndicat,  however, 
were  still  continuing  their  efforts  to  bring  pressure  to 
bear  upon  the  companies,  when  their  plans  were  frus- 
trated by  the  sudden  outbreak  on  the  railroad  system 
known  as  Paris-Nord. 

The  strike,  begun  in  Paris  on  October  10,  rapidly 
spread  over  the  system  Paris-Nord.  The  next  day  the 
strike  committee  ordered  a  general  railroad  strike,  and 
the  order  was  followed  on  October  12  by  the  Western 
system  of  railroads.  On  October  13  M.  Briand  arrested 
the  members  of  the  strike  committee  and  ordered  the 
striking  railway  men  under  colors,  thus  putting  them 
under  martial  law.  A  second  strike  committee  auto- 
matically took  the  place  of  the  leaders  who  were  arrested, 
but  it  did  not  display  much  energy.  Besides,  the  re- 
sponse to  the  strike  order  on  the  eastern  and  southern 
railroad  lines  was  very  slight,  and  towards  the  end  of 
the  week  the  strike  was  practically  defeated.  By  order 
of  the  second  strike  committee  work  was  resumed  on  all 
lines  on  October  18. 

The  failure  of  the  railway  strike  was  a  heavy  blow  not 
only  to  the  syndicat  of  Railway  Workers,  but  to  the 
general  labor  movement  of  France.  It  resulted  in  the 
disorganization  of  one  of  the  strongest  syndicats  and 
added  fuel  to  the  dying  embers  of  factional  strife.  The 
revolutionary  elements  in  the  Confederation  attributed 
the  failure  of  the  strike  to  the  hesitating  tactics  of  the 
"reformist"  leaders  and  to  the  intervention  of  the 
socialist  politicians  who  tried  to  make  political  capital 
out  of  the  strike  situation.  The  "  reformists,"  on  the 
other  hand,  accused  the  revolutionists  of  precipitating 
the  strike  and  of  defeating  the  general  movement  by 
hasty  action  on  the  Paris-Nord.  Two  facts,  however, 


423]       THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR         193 

stand  out  clear :  first,  that  the  Confederation  of  Labor 
did  not  direct  the  strike,  which  was  a  purely  trade  move- 
ment largely  dominated  by  reformist  and  political  ele- 
ments ;  secondly,  that  the  strike  was  defeated  mainly  by 
the  quick  and  energetic  action  of  M.  Briand,  who  treated 
the  strike  as  a  revolt,  sent  soldiers  to  replace  the  strikers, 
and  mobilized  the  latter  for  military  service. 

The  dissensions  provoked  by  the  railway  strike  ac- 
centuated the  "crisis"  in  the  General  Confederation  of 
Labor  and  hampered  its  activities.  Still,  amid  these  in- 
ternal struggles,  the  Confederal  Committee  made  per 
sistent  efforts  to  carry  out  the  program  of  action  which 
was  outlined  for  it  at  the  congress  of  Toulouse.  Dur- 
ing 1910-1911  it  carried  on  a  relentless  campaign  against 
the  old-age  pension  law  which  was  passed  in  April,  1910. 
The  French  workingmen  were  opposed  to  the  age  limit 
imposed  by  the  law  (65  years),  to  the  system  of  capital- 
ization, and  to  the  obligatory  deductions  of  the  worker's 
contribution  from  his  wages.  The  campaign  was  effect- 
ive to  the  extent  of  forcing  several  important  modifica- 
tions in  the  law  in  favor  of  the  workers. 

At  the  same  time  the  Confederation  carried  on  a  cam- 
paign against  the  high  cost  of  living  ascribing  it  to 
speculation  and  to  the  protective  system.  Meetings 
were  held  throughout  France,  and  demonstrations  were 
arranged  ;  in  many  places  bread  riots  took  place  in  which 
the  leaders  of  the  Bourses  and  of  the  Confederal  Com- 
mittee took  part. 

But  the  greatest  part  of  the  energy  of  the  Confedera- 
tion was  directed  against  the  wave  of  militarism  and 
nationalism  which  began  to  sweep  France  after  the  inci- 
dent of  Agadir  in  the  summer  of  1910.  The  Confedera- 
tion of  Labor  felt  that  the  labor  movement  in  general 
and  the  revolutionary  tendencies  in  particular  were  en- 


194 


THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE 


[424 


dangered  by  the  nationalist  spirit  and  military  excite- 
ment which  was  stirring  the  country.  Meetings  were 
organized  all  over  France  to  protest  against  war  and 
militarism  ;  several  international  meetings  were  arranged 
in  Berlin,  Madrid,  Paris,  and  London,  at  which  speakers 
representing  all  European  countries  spoke  against  war 
and  in  favor  of  international  peace.  The  idea  of  a  gen- 
eral strike  in  case  of  war  was  revived  and  agitated  in  the 
syndicalist  organizations  as  a  warning  to  the  French 
government. 

In  September,  1912,  the  twelfth  congress  of  the  Con- 
federation was  held  at  Toulouse.  The  report  of  the 
Confederal  Committee  showed  that  the  Confederation 
was  not  making  as  much  progress  as  before.  The 
growth  of  the  General  Confederation  of  Labor  in  rela- 
tion to  the  general  labor  movement  of  the  country  may 
be  judged  from  the  following  table  : 


Year 

Number 
Syndicats 
•"Vance 

is  "8  « 
H'|  |s 

c 

cats 
ering  to 
ifederation 

:>ers  of 
ifederation 

H 

l?l.s 

H 

|2?1<S 

ll(5 

o  („  ) 

1902  

3,680 

614,204 

30 

i,043 

1904.... 

4,227 

715,576 

53 

1,792 

150,000 

1906  

4,857 

836,134 

61 

2,39Q 

203,273 

1908  

5,524 

957,102 

63 

2,586 

294,398 

1910  

5,260 

977,350 

57 

3,012 

357,8i4 

1912  

5,217 

1,064,000 

53 

2,837 

400,000 

The   slackening   in   the  growth  of   the  Confederation 


425]       THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR         195 

was  attributed  partly  to  the  persistent  persecutions  of 
the  government,  but  in  the  main  to  internal  dissensions 
and  struggles.  As  a  result  of  the  latter,  many  of  the 
old  militants  who  had  taken  a  leading  part  in  the  syndi- 
calist organizations  had  become  disillusioned  and  had  left 
the  movement.  Many  of  the  syndicats  had  lost  in  mem- 
bership, and  new  syndicats  were  formed  with  great 
difficulty. 

The  supreme  effort  of  the  Congress  of  Toulouse  was, 
therefore,  to  assert  once  more  the  leading  ideas  of  syndi- 
calism and  to  unite  all  labor  elements  upon  a  common 
platform  of  action.  A  long  debate  between  representa- 
tives of  the  various  tendencies  took  place  in  consequence 
of  which  the  Congress  reaffirmed  the  resolution  of  Amiens 
(1906)  known  as  the  "charter  of  syndicalism."1  The 
most  important  resolution,  however,  was  that  in  favor  of 
a  general  movement  for  the  reduction  of  hours  of  labor, 
particularly  for  the  establishment  of  the  "  English  week" 
(La  semaine  Anglaise,  i.  e.  half  holiday  on  Saturday). 
The  Confederal  Committee  was  authorized  to  carry  on  a 
campaign  similar  in  character  to  the  Campaign  of  1906 
in  favor  of  the  eight  hour  day.  '  To  meet  the  necessary 
expenses  the  dues  were  raised  to  ten  francs  per  thousand 
members  for  each  Federation  of  industry  and  to  seven 
francs  per  thousand  members  for  each  Departmental 
Union. 

The  discussion  at  the  Congress  of  Toulouse  showed 
very  clearly  that  the  leaders  of  the  syndicalist  organiza- 
tions were  becoming  tired  of  perennial  debates  and  that 
they  were  anxious  to  save  the  Confederation  from  its 
present  critical  condition  by  a  vigorous  campaign  for 
shorter  hours,  which  would  appeal  to  the  mass  of  work- 
ing men  and  women.  The  Confederal  Committee,  how- 

"  See  page  183. 


I96  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [426 

ever,  has  not  been  very  successful  in  this  since  the  con- 
gress of  Toulouse,  for  two  principal  reasons :  the  mili- 
taristic excitement  of  Europe  and  the  general  industrial 
depression.  During  1913,  the  Confederation  was  en- 
gaged in  fighting  the  increase  in  military  expenses  and 
particularly  the  passage  of  the  the  three  years'  military 
service  law.  In  May  and  June  a  number  of  revolts  took 
place  in  the  barracks,  mainly  among  the  soldiers  who 
would  have  been  released  in  1913,  had  not  the  new  law 
been  made  retroactive.  The  government  accused  the 
Confederation  of  instigating  the  revolts  of  the  soldiers, 
and  made  numerous  arrests  among  the  leaders  of  the 
principal  syndicats  in  Paris  and  in  the  province.  The 
Confederation  repudiated  complicity  in  the  revolts,  but 
asserted  its  right  to  maintain  relations  with  the  soldiers 
by  means  of  the  Sou  du  Soldat.  A  number  of  protest 
meetings  were  held  in  Paris  and  other  cities  against  the 
new  military  law,  and  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  this 
agitation  resulted  in  the  modifications  of  the  law  which 
practically  reduced  the  actual  time  of  service  by  several 
months. 

At  the  same  time,  the  activities  of  the  General  Con- 
federation of  Labor  during  1913  revealed  a  conscious 
determination  to  steer  clear  of  hazardous  movements  of 
a  revolutionary  character.  In  July,  1913,  the  Federa- 
tions of  industries  and  the  Bourses  du  Travail  held  their 
third  annual  Conference  in  Paris,  at  which  questions  of 
administration  and  policy  were  discussed.  A  number  of 
delegates  demanded  that  a  general  strike  be  declared  on 
September  24,  when  the  soldiers  ought  to  have  been 
released  from  the  barracks.  This  proposition  was  de- 
feated as  an  unwise  measure.  Among  those  who  spoke 
against  the  proposition  were  some  of  the  ablest  repre- 
sentatives of  the  revolutionary  syndicalists,  like  Jouhaux, 


427]   THE  GENERAL  CONFEDERATION  OF  LABOR 

the  general  secretary ;  Merrheim,  the  secretary  of  the 
Federation  of  the  metal  industry,  and  others.  The 
cautious  action  of  the  Confederation  incensed  the  anarch- 
ist groups  who  had  supported  the  Confederation  all 
along,  and  they  began  to  criticise  the  latter  for  "  turning 
to  the  right."  The  leaders  of  the  Confederation,  how- 
ever, explained  their  action  not  by  any  change  in  ideas, 
but  by  a  desire  to  hew  to  the  line  of  strictly  labor  de- 
mands for  the  time  being. 

While  making  efforts  to  increase  its  strength  at  home, 
the  Confederation  of  Labor  has  been  endeavoring  in 
recent  years  to  spread  the  ideas  of  French  syndicalism 
abroad,  and  has  been  watching  with  great  interest  the 
new  tendencies  in  the  labor  movement  of  England  and 
the  activities  of  the  Industrial  Workers  of  the  World  in 
the  United  States.  Its  main  efforts  outside  of  France, 
have  been  exerted  at  the  conferences  of  the  Interna- 
tional Secretariat  of  Labor.  These  conferences  have 
been  held  every  t\vo  years  since  1903  by  the  secretaries 
of  the  adhering  National  Trade  Union  Centers.1  The 
General  Confederation  took  part  in  the  Conference  of 
Dublin  in  1903,  but  sent  no  delegates  to  the  Conferences 
of  Amsterdam  (1905)  or  of  Christiana  (1907)  because 
these  conferences  refused  to  discuss  the  questions  of  the 
general  strike  and  of  anti-militarism.  The  relations  of 
the  Confederation  to  the  International  Secretariat  have 
been  much  discussed  at  the  Congresses  of  the  Confeder- 
ation and  in  the  press.  The  Congress  of  Marseilles, 
though  approving  the  policy  of  the  Confederal  Com- 
mittee, recommended  that  the  latter  enter  into  closer 
relations  with  the  International  Secretariat.  Since  then 

'The  first  two  conferences  were  held  at  Balberstadt  (1900)  and  at 
Stuttgart  (1902). 


198  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [428  ' 

the  Confederation  has  taken  part  in  the  Conferences  of 
Paris  in  1909,'  Budapest  (1911),  and  Zurich  (1913). 

In  the  International  organization  the  Confederation 
tries  to  enforce  its  views  on  the  general  strike  and  ad- 
vocates the  organization  of  International  Labor  Con- 
gresses. Its  ideas  meet  here,  however,  with  the  oppo- 
sition of  American,  English,  German  and  Austrian  trades 
unions.  The  latter  are  the  more  numerous.  Germany 
pays  dues  to  the  International  Secretariat  for  2,017,000 
organized  workingmen;  the  United  States  for  1,700,000; 
England  for  725,000;  Austria  for  480,000;  France  for 
340,000.  The  total  number  of  organized  workingmen 
affiliated  with  the  International  Secretariat  is  6,033, 5°°* 

1  An  account  of  the  Paris  conference  is  given  in  Mr.  Gompers'  Labor 
in  Europe  and  America  (New  York,  1910). 

2  These  figures  are  for  1911. 


CHAPTER  VIII 

CHARACTER  AND  CONDITIONS  OF  REVOLUTIONARY 
SYNDICALISM 

THE  history  of  the  General  Confederation  of  Labor  as 
told  in  the  preceding  chapters  has  brought  out  in  a  gen- 
eral way  the  character  of  revolutionary  syndicalism  and 
the  conditions  which  have  influenced  its  rise  and  devel- 
opment. It  remains  now  in  this  last  chapter  to  em- 
phasize the  principal  points  and  to  strengthen  them  by 
a  more  complete  analysis  of  facts  and  conditions. 

It  has  been  maintained  throughout  this  work  that 
revolutionary  syndicalism  was  created  by  a  bloc  of  revo- 
lutionary elements  in  the  Confederation.  This  character 
of  a  bloc  has  been  denied  by  many.  Those  hostile  to  the 
Confederation  are  anxious  to  create  the  impression  that 
the  latter  is  exclusively  the  creation  and  the  tool  of  the 
anarchists.  Others  more  or  less  impartial  fail  to  ac- 
knowledge the  part  played  in  the  movement  by  the  non- 
anarchist  elements.  Some  anarchists  themselves  are 
only  too  glad  to  be  considered  the  creators  of  the  move- 
ment and  to  maintain  a  view  which  is  a  tribute  to  their 
organizing  ability  and  to  their  influence. 

Many  revolutionary  syndicalists,  however,  protest 
against  being  considered  anarchists.  Some  of  them  are 
active  members  of  the  Unified  Socialist  Party.  Others 
do  not  belong  to  the  Socialist  party,  but  have  never  been 
connected  with  the  Anarchists.  They  are  revolutionary 
syndicalists,  "pure  and  simple."  And  these  two  other 
elements  are  by  no  means  less  influential  in  the  Confed- 
eration than  the  Anarchists. 

429]  199 


200  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [430 

I  The  three  elements  enumerated  have  somewhat  differ- 
(ent  ways  of  regarding  revolutionary  syndicalism.  To 
the  anarchists  revolutionary  syndicalism  is  but  a  partial 
application  of  anarchist  ideas.  M.  Yvetot,  secretary  of 
the  section  of  Bourses,  said  at  the  recent  Congress  of 
Toulouse  (1910)  :  "  I  am  reproached  with  confusing  syn- 
dicalism and  anarchism.  It  is  not  my  fault  if  anarchism 
and  syndicalism  have  the  same  ends  in  view.  The  former 
pursues  the  integral  emancipation  of  the  individual  ; 
the  latter  the  integral  emancipation  of  the  workingman. 
I  find  the  whole  of  syndicalism  in  anarchism.  "  r 

To  the  revolutionary  socialists  in  the  Confederation 
syndicalism  is  the  primary  and  fundamental  form  of  revo- 
lutionary socialism.  It  does  not  exclude,  however,  other 
forms  ;  on  the  contrary,  it  must  be  completed  by  the  po- 
litical organization  of  the  Socialist  party,  because  it  has 
no  answer  of  its  own  to  many  social  problems, 

The  third  group  of  revolutionary  sydicalists  regards 
revolutionary  syndicalism  as  self-sufficing  and  indepen- 
dent of  both  anarchism  and  socialism.  This  group,  like 
the  first,  emphasizes  the  fact  that  there  is  an  irreconcila- 
ble antagonism  between  syndicalism  and  political  socialism. 
'*  It  is  necessary, "  writes  Jouhaux,  secretary  of  the  Con- 
federation, "  that  the  proletariat  should  know  that  between 
parliamentary  socialism,  which  is  tending  more  and  more 
toward  a  simple  democratization  of  existing  social  forms, 
and  syndicalism,  which  pursues  the  aim  of  a  complete 
social  transformation,  there  is  not  only  divergence  of 
methods,  but  particularly  divergence  of  aims.  * 

Those  who  consciously  call  themselves  revolutionary 
syndicalists  belong  to  one  of  the  groups  described,  and 

1  La  Vie  Ouvritre,  20  Oct.,   1910,  p.  483;   XVII  Congrts  National 
Corporatif  (Toulouse,  1910),  p.  226. 
5  L.  Jouhaux,  Le  Ttrrassier,  20  June,  1911. 


43 1  ]  CHARACTER  AND  CONDITIONS  2OI 

the  three  groups  constitute  the  bloc  spoken  of  above. 
To  understand  revolutionary  syndicalism  means  to  under- 
stand this  bloc  of  revolutionary  elements,  how  it  was 
made  possible,  why  it  is  maintained,  and  what  condi- 
tions have  secured  for  it  the  leadership  in  the  General 
Confederation  of  Labor. 

It  has  been  shown  in  the  preceding  chapters  that 
since  1830  a  considerable  part  of  the  French  working- 
men,  the  so-called  "militant"  workingmen,  have  always 
cherished  the  hope  of  a  "  complete "  or  "  integral  " 
emancipation  which  should  free  them  from  the  wage- 
system  and  from  the  economic  domination  of  the  em- 
ployer. The  desire  of  independence  had  guided  the  life 
of  the  journeyman  under  the  guild-system,  and  its  birth 
under  modern  economic  conditions  is  natural  enough 
to  need  no  explanation.  But  while  under  the  guild- 
system  this  desire  had  an  individualistic  character,  under 
the  technical  conditions  of  the  present  time  it  neces- 
sarily led  to  collectivist  ideas.  With  the  development 
of  highly  expensive  means  of  production,  only  an  insig- 
nificant number  of  workingmen  could  hope  to  become 
economically  independent  by  individual  action,  and  the 
only  way  to  attain  economic  freedom  and  equality  for  all 
pointed  to  the  collective  appropriation  of  the  means  of 
production  and  to  the  collective  management  of  indus- 
trial activities. 

The  insistence  on  economic  freedom — in  the  sense 
indicated — runs  through  all  the  literature  of  the  French 
Labor  Movement.  It  is  not  only  and  not  so  much  the 
inequality  of  wealth,  the  contrasts  of  distribution  that 
stimulate  the  militant  workingmen  to  their  collectivist 
hopes,  as  it  is  the  protest  against  the  "arbitrariness"  of 
the  employer  and  the  ideal  of  a  "free  workshop."  To 
attain  the  latter  is  the  main  thing  and  forms  the  program 


202  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [432 

of  the  General  Confederation  as  formulated  in  the  first 
clause  of  its  statutes. 

The  sensitiveness  to  economic  inferiority  is  increased 
in  the  French  militant  workingmen  by  the  fact  that  in  a 
country  like  France  economic  distinctions  are  combined 
with  social  distinctions.  Owing  to  the  traditions  of  the 
past,  economic  classes  are  separated  by  a  number  of 
other  elements,  in  which  intellectual,  social  and  other 
influences  combine  and  which  transform  the  economic 
classes  into  social  classes.  The  aspiration  towards  eco- 
nomic equality  increases,  therefore,  in  volume  and  be- 
comes a  striving  after  social  equality. 

The  historical  traditions  of  France  combined  with  the 
impatience  for  emancipation  explain  the  revolutionary 
spirit  of  the  French  socialist  workingman.  All  who 
have  come  into  contact  with  French  life  have  convinced 
themselves  of  the  power  which  the  revolutionary  tra- 
ditions of  the  past  exert  over  the  people.  The  French 
workingman  is  brought  up  in  the  admiration  of  the  men 
of  the  Great  Revolution ;  his  modern  history  is  full  of 
revolutionary  secret  societies,  of  insurrections,  and  of 
revolutionary  struggles.  He  cherishes  the  memory  of 
the  Revolution  of  1848,  his  indignation  is  aroused  by  the 
story  of  the  Days  of  June,  his  pity  and  sympathy  are 
stimulated  by  the  events  of  the  Commune.  Looking 
backward  into  the  history  of  the  past  century  and  a  half, 
he  can  only  get  the  feeling  of  political  instability,  and  the 
conviction  is  strengthened  in  him  that  "  his  "  revolution 
will  come  just  as  the  revolution  of  the  "Third-Estate" 
had  come.  Combined  with  the  desire  to  attain  the 
"integral"  emancipation  as  soon  as  possible,  these  con- 
ditions engender  in  him  the  revolutionary  spirit.1 

1  On  the  peculiar  character  of  French  history  see  Adams,  Growth  of 
the  French  Nation;  Berry,  France  since  Waterloo ;  Barrett  Wendell, 
France  of  To-day. 


433]  CHARACTER  AND  CONDITIONS  203 

The  revolutionary  spirit  predisposes  the  socialist  work- 
ingman  to  a  skeptical  attitude  toward  parliamentary 
action  which  rests  on  conciliation  and  on  compromise 
and  is  slow  in  operation.  He  seeks  for  other  methods 
which  seem  to  promise  quicker  results.  The  methods 
themselves  may  change;  they  were  insurrection  once, 
they  are  now  the  general  strike.  But  the  end  they  serve 
remains  the  same  :  to  keep  up  the  hope  of  a  speedy 
liberation. 

The  distrust  of  parliamentary  methods  has  been 
strengthened  in  the  French  socialist  workingman  by 
another  fact.  The  French  workingmen  have  seen  their 
political  leaders  rise  to  the  very  top,  become  Ministers 
and  Premiers  (e.  g.,  Millerand,  Vivani,  Briand),  and  then 
turn  against  their  "  comrades  "  of  old.  The  feeling  has 
been  thereby  created  in  the  socialist  workingmen  that 
parliamentary  methods  are  merely  a  means  to  a  brilliant 
career  for  individuals  who  know  how  to  make  use  of 
them. 

The  mistrust  of  "politicians"  finds  some  nourishment 
in  the  fact  that  the  political  leaders  of  the  Socialist 
movement  are  generally  the  "  intellectuals,"  between 
whom  and  the  workingmen  there  is  also  some  antago- 
nism. The  "  intellectuals  "  are  thrown  out  upon  the  social 
arena  principally  by  the  lower  and  middle  bourgeoisie 
and  generally  enter  the  liberal  professions.  But  whether 
lawyer,  writer,  doctor  or  teacher,  the  French  "  intellec- 
tual "  sooner  or  later  enters  the  field  of  "politics"  which 
allures  him  by  the  vaster  possibilities  it  seems  to  offer. 
In  fact,  the  "intellectual"  has  always  been  a  conspicuous 
figure  in  the  historv  of  French  Socialism.  As  a  socialist 
poet,  Pierre  Dupont,  sang, 

"  Socialism  has  two  wings, 
The  student  and  the  workingman.  " 


204  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [434 

And  as  the  socialist  ideas  have  spread,  the  number  of 
"intellectuals"  in  the  socialist  movement  has  been  con- 
stantly increasing. 

The  "two  wings"  of  the  Socialists,  however,  cannot 
perfectly  adapt  themselves  to  one  another.  The  "intel- 
lectual" generally  lacks  the  "  impatience  for  deliverance  " 
which  characterizes  the  socialist  workingman.  The  "in- 
tellectual "  is  bound  by  more  solid  ties  to  the  status  quo; 
his  intellectual  preoccupations  predispose  him  to  a  calm- 
er view  of  things,  to  regard  society  as  a  slow  evolu- 
tionary process.  Besides,  the  "intellectual"  takes  pride 
in  the  fact  that  he  supplies  "  the  proletariat  with  fresh 
elements  of  enlightenment  and  progress  "  ;  he  is  inclined, 
therefore,  to  dominate  the  workingman  as  his  "  minor 
brother  ",  and  to  advocate  methods  which  secure  his  own 
predominant  part  in  the  movement.  Parliamentary  action 
is  the  field  best  adapted  to  his  character  and  powers. 
The  socialist  workingman,  on  the  other  hand,  protests 
against  the  tendencies  of  the  "intellectual",  particularly 
against  the  dominating  impulses  of  the  latter.  He  is 
anxious  to  limit  the  powers  of  his  leaders,  if  possible,  and 
to  create  such  forms  of  organization  as  shall  assure  his 
0wn  independence. 

/  When  the  syndicats  began  to  develop  in  France,  the 
revolutionary  workingmen  seized  upon  them  as  a  form 
of  organization  particularly  adapted  to  their  demands. 
The  syndicat  was  an  organization  which  could  take  up 
the  ideal  of  social  emancipation ;  in  the  general  strike, 
which  the  syndicat  seemed  to  carry  within  itself,  there 
was  a  method  of  speedy  liberation ;  the  syndicat  ex- 
cluded the  "intellectuals"  and  above  all  by  its  "direct 
action  "  it  maintained  and  strengthened  the  revolution- 
ary spirit  and  safeguarded  the  revolutionary  ideal  from 
the  compromises  and  dangers  to  which  politics  and  the 
parliamentary  socialists  subjected  it. 


435]  CHARACTER  AND  CONDITIONS  205 

These  conditions  :  the  hope  of  social  emancipation,  the 
impatience  for  deliverance,  the  revolutionary  spirit,  and 
the  defiance  of  the  "intellectuals"  and  of  the  "poli- 
ticians," gave  and  continue  to  give  life  to  revolutionary 
syndicalism.  They  brought  into  being  the  "revolution- 
ary bloc"  in  the  General  Confederation  of  Labor  and 
maintain  it  there.  Of  course,  differences  of  tempera- 
ment and  shadings  of  opinion  exist.  On  the  one  ex- 
treme are  those  who  are  most  vehement  in  their  propa- 
ganda and  who  combat  the  Socialist  party;  on  the  other, 
are  the  revolutionary  socialists  who  are  disposed  to  co- 
operate with  the  parliamentary  socialists,  but  who  want 
to  have  an  independent  organization  to  fall  back  upon  in 
case  of  disagreement  with  the  political  party.  But  differ- 
ing in  details,  the  revolutionary  elements  agree  in  the 
main  points  and  they  stamp  upon  the  Confederation  the 
character  which  it  bears  and  which  is  described  in  the 
terms  "revolutionary  syndicalism.'* 

The  opponents  of  the  revolutionary  syndicalists  claim 
that  the  latter  are  followed  only  by  a  minority  in  the 
General  Confederation  and  that  they  maintain  their  lead- 
ership by  means  of  the  existing  system  of  representation 
and  by  other  more  or  less  arbitrary  devices.  This  state- 
ment, however,  cannot  be  proved  in  any  satisfactory 
way. 

The  best  way  of  obtaining  the  exact  number  of  revo- 
lutionary syndicalists  in  the  Confederation  would  seem 
to  be  by  means  of  an  analysis  of  the  votes  taken  at  the 
Congresses.  This  method,  however,  is  defective  for  sev- 
eral reasons.  In  the  first  place,  not  all  the  syndicats 
adhering  to  the  Confederation  are  represented  at  the 
Congresses.  At  the  Congress  of  Bourges  (1904),  1,178 
syndicats  out  of  1,792  were  represented;  at  the  Congress 
of  Amiens,  1,040  out  of  2.399;  at  tne  Congress  of  Mar- 


206  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [436 

seilles,  1,102  out  of  2,586,  and  at  the  Congress  of 
Toulouse,  1,390  out  of  3,012.  It  is  evident,  therefore, 
that  even  if  all  the  votes  were  taken  unanimously,  they 
would  still  express  the  opinion  of  less  than  half  the  syn- 
dicats  of  the  Confederation. 

In  the  second  place,  the  votes  of  the  Confederation 
being  taken  by  syndicats,  to  get  the  exact  figures  it 
would  be  necessary  to  know  how  many  syndicats  in  each 
federation  are  revolutionary  or  not,  and  what  is  the  pro- 
portional strength  of  both  tendencies  in  each  syndicat. 
This  is  impossible  in  the  present  state  of  statistical  in- 
formation furnished  by  the  Confederation. 

At  the  Congress  of  Amiens,  for  instance,  the  vote  ap- 
proving the  report  of  the  Confederal  Committee  (Sec- 
tion of  Federation)  stood  815  against  106  (18  blanks). 
This  vote  is  important,  because  to  approve  or  to  reject 
the  report  meant  to  approve  or  to  reject  the  ideas  by 
which  the  General  Confederation  is  guided. 

Now,  an  analysis  of  the  vote  at  Amiens  shows  that 
while  some  organizations  voted  solidly  for  the  Confederal 
Committee,  none  voted  solidly  against  it  and  that  the 
votes  of  many  organizations  were  divided.  But  even  the 
number  of  those  represented  by  the  unanimous  vote  of 
their  syndicats  cannot  in  the  most  cases  be  ascertained. 
For  instance,  the  agricultural  syndicats  cast  their  28 
votes  for  the  Confederal  Committee;  the  report  of  the 
Confederal  Committee  gives  the  Federation  of  Agri- 
cultural Laborers  4,405  members;  but  the  same  report 
says  that  the  Federation  consisted  of  106  syndicats;  of 
these  106  syndicats  only  28  were  represented  at  the 
Congress,  and  how  many  members  they  represented 
there  is  no  possibility  of  ascertaining.  The  same  is  true 
of  those  Federations  in  which  the  syndicats  did  not  cast 
the  same  vote. 


437]  CHARACTER  AND  CONDITIONS  2O? 

This  difficulty  is  felt  by  those  who  try  to  prove  by  fig- 
ures that  the  Confederation  is  dominated  by  a  minority. 
M.  Ch.  Franck,  for  instance,  calculates  that  at  the  Con- 
gress of  Marseilles  46  organizations  with  716  mandates 
representing  143,191  members  obtained  the  majority  for 
the  statu  quo  against  the  proposition  of  proportional 
representation  ;  while  the  minority  consisted  of  15  organ- 
izations with  379  mandates  representing  145, 440  members. 
In  favor  of  the  anti-militaristic  resolution,  he  calculates 
further,  33  organizations  with  670  mandates  representing 
114,491  members  obtained  the  majority  against  19  organ- 
izations with  406  mandates  representing  126, 540  members. 
But  he  is  compelled  to  add  immediately  :  ''  These  figures 
have  no  absolute  value,  because  we  have  taken  each  or- 
ganization in  its  entirety,  while  in  the  same  federation  some 
syndicats  have  not  voted  with  the  majority";  he  thinks 
that  the  proportion  remains  nevertheless  the  same  because 
he  did  not  take  into  consideration  the  divisions  on  each 
side. ' 

The  last  assumption,  however,  is  arbitrary,  because  the 
syndicats  dissenting  on  the  one  side  may  have  been  more 
numerous  than  those  not  voting  with  the  majority  on  the 
other  side ;  the  whole  calculation,  besides,  is  fallacious, 
because  it  takes  the  figures  of  the  federations  in  their 
entirety,  while  only  a  part  of  the  syndicats  composing 
them  took  part  in  the  votes. 

The  attempt,  therefore,  to  estimate  the  exact  number 
of  the  revolutionary  syndicalists  in  the  Confederation 
must  be  given  up  for  the  present.  The  approximate  es- 
timate on  either  side  can  be  given.  According  to  M. 
Pawlowski, 2  250,000  members  of  the  Confederation  (out 

1  Op.  cit.,  pp.  345-6. 

2  A.  Pawlowski,  La  Confederation  Gtn&raledu  7rava.il  (Paris,  1910), 
P-  Si- 


208  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [438 

of  400,000)  repudiate  the  revolutionary  doctrine ;  the 
revolutionary  syndicalists,  on  the  other  hand,  claim  a  ma- 
jority of  two-thirds  for  themselves.  The  impartial  stu- 
dent must  leave  the  question  open. 

It  must  be  pointed  out,  however,  that  the  system  of 
representation  which  exists  now  in  the  Confederation 
affects  both  revolutionary  and  reformist  syndicalists  in  a 
more  or  less  equal  degree.  At  the  Congress  of  Amiens, 
for  instance,  the  Fbd&ration  du  Livre,  with  its  10,000 
members,  had  135  votes;  the  Railway  Syndicat,  with  its 
24,275  members,  had  only  36  votes ;  these  two  organiza- 
tions were  among  the  "reformists"  who  combated  the 
Confederal  Committee.  On  the  other  hand,  the  revolu- 
tionary Federation  of  Metallurgy  had  84  votes  for  its 
14,000  members,  but  the  Federation  of  Marine,  which  is 
also  revolutionary,  disposed  of  six  votes  only  for  its  12,- 
ooo  members.  The  revolutionary  syndicalists,  therefore, 
may  be  right  in  their  assertion  that  proportional  repre- 
sentation would  not  change  the  leadership  of  the  Con- 
federation. This  belief  is  strengthened  in  them  by  the 
fact  that  in  all  so- called  "reformist"  organizations,  as 
the  Ftd&ration  du  Livre,  the  Railway  Syndicat,  etc., 
there  are  strong  and  numerous  revolutionary  minorities. 

It  is  often  asserted  that  only  the  small  syndicats, 
mostly  belonging  to  the  small  trades,  follow  the  revolu- 
tionary syndicalists.  This  assertion,  however,  is  inexact. 
An  examination  of  the  syndicats  which  are  considered 
revolutionary  shows  that  some  of  them  are  very  large 
and  that  others  belong  to  the  most  centralized  industries 
of  France.  For  instance,  the  Federation  of  Building 
Trades  is  the  most  revolutionary  organization  in  the 
Confederation ;  at  the  same  time  it  is  the  most  numer- 
ous, and  its  members  pay  the  highest  dues  (after  the 


439]  CHARACTER  AND  CONDITIONS  209 

Federation  du  Livre)  in  France.1  The  revolutionary 
Federation  of  Metallurgy  is  also  one  of  the  large  organ- 
izations in  the  Confederation  and  belongs  to  an  industry 
which  is  one  of  the  most  centralized  in  France.  The 
total  horse-power  of  machines  used  in  the  metallurgic 
industries  has  increased  from  175,070  in  1891  to  419,128 
in  1906;  the  number  of  establishments  has  diminished 
from  4,642  in  1891  to  4,544  in  1906;  that  is,  the  total 
horse-power  of  machinery  used  in  every  industrial  estab- 
lishment has  increased  during  this  period  from  38  to 
92  ; 2  the  number  of  workingmen  per  industrial  establish- 
ment has  also  increased  from  508  in  1896  to  697  in  1901 
and  to  711  in  1906.  In  fact  the  metallurgic  industry 
occupies  the  second  place  after  the  mining  industry 
which  is  the  most  centralized  in  France.3 

A  diversity  of  conditions  prevails  in  the  industries  to 
which  the  other  revolutionary  organizations  belong. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  so-called  reformist  organizations, 
the  Federation  of  Mines,  the  Federation  du  Livre,  the 
Federation  of  Employees,  differ  in  many  respects  and  are 
determined  in  their  policy  by  many  considerations  and 
conditions  which  are  peculiar  to  each  one  of  them. 

The  influence  of  the  revolutionary  syndicalists,  there- 
fore, can  be  explained  not  by  special  technical  conditions, 
but  by  general  conditions  which  are  economic,  political 
and  psychological.  To  bring  out  the  relation  of  these 
conditions  to  the  syndicalist  doctrine  it  is  necessary  to 
analyze  the  latter  into  its  constituent  elements  and  to 
discuss  them  one  by  one. 

The  fundamental  condition  which  determines  the  policy 

1  Mouvement  Socialiste,  May,  1911. 

1  E.  Thery,  Les  Progrts  Economiques  de  la  France  (Paris,  1909),  p. 
181. 
*  Journal  des  Economistes,  Jan.,  1911.  p.  133. 


2io  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [440 

of  "  direct  action  "  is  the  poverty  of  French  syndicalism. 
Except  the  Fkdiration  du  Livre,  only  a  very  few  fed- 
erations pay  a  more  or  less  regular  strike  benefit;  the 
rest  have  barely  means  enough  to  provide  for  their  ad- 
ministrative and  organizing  expenses  and  can  not  collect 
any  strike  funds  worth  mentioning.  In  1908,  for  in- 
stance, there  were  1,073  strikes;  of  these  837  were  con- 
ducted by  organized  workingmen.  Only  in  46  strikes 
was  regular  assistance  assured  for  the  strikers,  and  in  36 
cases  only  was  the  assistance  given  in  money.1  The 
French  workingmen,  therefore,  are  forced  to  fall  back  on 
other  means  during  strikes.  Quick  action,  intimidation, 
sabotage,  are  then  suggested  to  them  by  their  very  situ- 
ation and  by  their  desire  to  win.  } 

The  lack  of  financial  strength  explains  also  the  en- 
thusiasm and  the  sentiments  of  general  solidarity  which 
characterize  French  strikes.  An  atmosphere  of  en- 
thusiasm must  be  created  in  order  to  keep  up  the  fight- 
ing spirit  in  the  strikers.  To  the  particular  struggle  in 
any  one  trade  a  wider  and  more  general  significance 
must  be  attributed;  it  must  be  interpreted  as  a  partial 
manifestation  of  a  more  general  class-struggle.  In  this 
way  the  determination  to  struggle  on  is  strengthened  in 
those  who  strike  and  a  moral  justification  is  created  for 
an  appeal  to  the  solidarity  of  all  workingmen.  These 
appeals  are  made  constantly  during  strikes.  Subscrip- 
tion lists  are  kept  in  the  Bourses  du  Travail,  in  the 
Confederal  Committee  on  Strikes,  and  are  opened  in  the 
workingmen's  and  socialist  newspapers  whenever  any 
big  strike  occurs. 

New  means  to  make  up  for  the  lack  of  financial  resour- 
ces are  constantly  devised.  Of  these  means  two  which 

1  Statistique  des  Graves,  1909,  vi-vii. 


44 !  ]  CHARA CTER  AND  CONDITIONS  2 1 1 

have  come  into  existence  within  recent  years  are  the 
soufies  communistes  and  the  "  exodus  of  children.  "  The 
soupes  communistes  are  organized  by  the  Bourses  du  Tra- 
vail and  consist  of  meals  distributed  to  those  on  strike. 
The  soupes  communistes  permit  the  feeding  of  a  compara- 
tively large  number  of  strikers  at  small  expense.  Distri- 
bution occurs  at  certain  points.  The  workingmen,  if  they 
wish,  may  take  their  meals  home.  The  last  Conferences 
of  the  section  of  Bourses  have  discussed  the  question  how 
to  organize  thesesoupes  communistes  more  systematically 
and  as  cheaply  as  possible. 

The  "exodus  of  children"  consists  in  sending  away  the 
children  of  the  strikers  to  workingmen  of  other  towns 
while  the  strike  is  going  on.  It  has  been  used  during 
several  strikes  and  attracted  widespread  attention.  The 
"  exodus  of  children  "  relieves  the  strikers  at  home  and 
and  creates  sympathy  for  them  over  the  country  at  large. 

Financial  weakness  has  also  led  French  syndicats  in 
recent  yeas  to  reconsider  the  question  of  co-operation. 
Various  federations  have  expressed  themselves  at  their 
federal  congresses  in  favor  of  '"'  syndicalist  co-operatives" 
in  which  all  associates  are  at  the  same  time  members  of 
the  syndicat  and  organized  on  a  communist  basis.  The 
main  argument  brought  forward  in  favor  of  such  co-op- 
eratives is  the  support  they  could  furnish  to  workingmen 
on  strike. 

The  poverty  of  the  French  syndicats  is  the  result  of  the 
reluctance  of  the  French  workingmen  to  pay  high  dues. 
In  the  FMZration  du  Livre,  which  has  the  highest  dues? 
every  member  pays  a  little  over  two  francs  a  month.  In 
other  federations  the  dues  are  lower,  coming  down  in  some 
organizations  to  10  centimes  a  month.  In  recent  years 
there  has  been  a  general  tendency  in  all  federations  to  in- 
crease dues,  but  the  efforts  of  the  syndicalist  functionaries 


212  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [442 

in  this  direction  have  met  with  but  slow  and  partial  suc- 
cess. 

The  reluctance  to  high  dues  is  in  part  the  result  of 
the  comparatively  low  wages  which  prevail  in  France. 
Another  factor  is  the  psychology  of  the  French  work- 
ingman.  "  Our  impulsive  and  rebellious  (frondeur) 
temperament,"  wrote  the  Commission  which  organized 
the  Congress  of  Montpellier,  "  does  not  lend  itself  to 
high  dues,  and  if  we  are  always  ready  to  painful  sacri- 
fices of  another  nature,  we  have  not  yet  been  able  to 
understand  the  enormous  advantages  which  would  follow 
from  strong  syndicalist  treasuries  maintained  by  higher 
assessments."1  The  French  workingmen  are  conscious 
of  their  peculiar  traits,  and  the  literature  of  the  syndi- 
calist movement  is  full  of  both  jeremiads  and  panegyrics 
with  regard  to  these  traits,  according  to  the  speaker 
and  to  the  circumstances.  The  French  workingmen 
recognize  that  they  lack  method,  persistence  and  fore- 
sight, while  they  are  sensitive,  impulsive  and  combative.2 

The  result  of  this  psychology  is  not  only  poor  syndi- 
cats,  but  syndicats  weak  in  other  respects.  Many  syndi- 
cats  are  but  loosely  held  together,  are  easily  dissolved 
and  are  composed  of  a  more  or  less  variable  and  shifting 
membership.  The  instability  is  increased  of  course  by 
the  absence  of  benevolent  features  in  the  syndicats.  The 
F&dkration  du  Livre  alone  pays  sick  and  other  benefits. 

The  weakness  of  the  syndicats  predisposes  the  French 
workingmen  to  more  and  more  generalized  forms  of 
struggle.  Syndicats  on  strike  impelled  by  the  desire  to 
increase  their  forces  try  to  involve  as  many  trades  and 
workingmen  as  possible  and  to  enhance  their  own 

1 XIII  Congrts  National  Corporatif,  1902,  pp.  30-31. 
* X  Congr&s  National  Corporatif,  p.  203;  XI I  Congrts  National  Cor- 
poratif, pp.  15,  29,  44. 


443]  CHARACTER  AND  CONDITIONS 

chances  by  enlarging  the  field  of  struggle.  This  is  why 
such  general  movements,  as  the  movement  for  an  eight- 
hour  day  in  1906,  described  in  the  preceding  chapter, 
are  advocated  by  the  syndicats.  The  latter  feel  that  in 
order  to  gain  any  important  demand  they  must  be 
backed  by  as  large  a  number  of  workingmen  as  possible. 
But  in  view  of  their  weakness,  the  syndicats  can  start  a 
large  movement  only  by  stirring  up  the  country,  by 
formulating  some  general  demand  which  appeals  to  all 
workingmen.  The  same  conditions  explain  in  part  the 
favor  which  the  idea  of  the  general  strike  has  found  in 
the  syndicats. 

Such  forms  of  struggle  must  necessarily  bring  the 
syndicats  into  conflict  with  the  State,  particularly  in 
France  where  the  State  is  highly  centralized  and  as- 
sumes so  many  functions.  With  a  people  so  impulsive 
as  the  French,  the  intervention  of  the  forces  of  the  State 
in  the  economic  struggles  must  inevitably  lead  to  col- 
lisions of  a  more  or  less  serious  character.  The  result  is 
a  feeling  of  bitterness  in  the  workingmen  towards  the 
army,  the  police  and  the  government  in  general.  The 
ground  is  thus  prepared  for  anti-militaristic,  anti-State 
and  anti-patriotic  ideas. 

;The  organized  workingmen  are  a  minority  of  the 
working-class.  Still  they  must  act  as  if  they  were  the 
majority  or  the  entirety  of  the  workingmen.  The  con- 
tradiction must  be  smoothed  over  by  some  explanation, 
and  the  theory  of  the  "  conscious  minority "  arises  to 
meet  the  situation.  The  weaker  the  syndicats  and  the 
more  often  they  are  exposed  to  the  danger  of  dissolution 
the  greater  the  necessity  of  the  theory.  A  disorganized 
syndicat  generally  leaves  behind  a  handful  of  militant 
workingmen  determined  to  keep  up  the  organization. 
The  theory  of  the  "conscious  minority"  is  both  a  stim- 


214  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [444 

ulus  to  and  a  justification  for  the  activities  of  these  per- 
sistent "  militants." 

To  the  conditions  described  the  French  love  of  theory, 
of  high-sounding  phrases,  and  of  idealistic  formulas  must 
be  added.  For  a  Frenchman  it  is  not  sufficient  to  act 
under  necessity :  the  act  must  be  generalized  into  a 
principle,  the  principles  sytematized,  and  the  system  of 
theory  compressed  into  concise  and  catching  formulas. 
And  once  abstracted,  systematized  and  formulated,  the 
ideas  become  a  distinct  force  exerting  an  influence  in  the 
same  direction  as  the  conditions  to  which  they  corre- 
spond. 

When  all  this  is  taken  into  account,  it  is  easier  to 
understand  the  influence  of  the  revolutionary  syndical- 
ists. It  is  insufficient  to  explain  their  leadership  by 
clever  machinations  of  the  Confederal  Committee,  as 
M.  Mermeix  and  many  others  do.  It  is  quite  true  that 
the  Confederal  Committee  tries  to  maintain  its  power  by 
all  means  possible.  It  sends  out  delegates  to  Federal 
Congresses,  on  conference  tours  over  the  country,  to 
assist  workingmen  on  strikes,  etc.  In  most  cases  it 
sends  only  men  who  represent  the  revolutionary  ideas  of 
the  Committee  and  who,  therefore,  strengthen  the  in- 
fluence of  the  latter  by  word  and  deed.  It  is  also  true 
that  in  most  Bourses  du  Travail  the  secretaries  are 
revolutionary  and  that  they  help  to  consolidate  the  in- 
fluence of  the  Confederal  Committee.  But  these  secre- 
taries have  not  usurped  their  power.  They  are  elected 
because  they  have  come  to  the  front  as  speakers,  writers, 
organizers,  strike-leaders,  etc.  And  they  could  come  to 
the  front  only  because  conditions  were  such  as  to  make 
their  ideas  and  services  helpful. 

Whatever  one's  attitude  to  the  Confederation,  one 
must  acknowledge  the  results  it  has  achieved.  The 


445]  CHARACTER  AND  CONDITIONS  2l$ 

strike  statistics  of  France,  given  in  the  following  table, 
show  the  following  facts  : 

Per  cent  of  Per  cent  of 

Period                               strikes  which  strikers  who  lost 

failed  their  strikes 

iSgo-iSgg 44.61  38.63 

1891-1900 43.86  34.17 

1892-1901 42.69  35.42 

1893-1902 42.48  31.75 

1894-1903 42.13  26.98 

1895-1904 40.24  25.09 

1896-1905 39.07  23.76 

1897-1906 38.05  25.91 

1898-1907 38.14  25.37 

1899-1908 35.79  25.83 

/ 

.''  Of  course,  these  results  can  not  be  attributed  entirely  to 

the  action  of  the  Confederation.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  influence  of  the  Confederation  on  the  improvement 
of  general  conditions  of  employment,  on  social  legisla- 
tion, etc.,  is  undeniable.  "  In  all  branches  of  human 
activity,"  says  M.  Pawlowski,  "wages  have  risen  with  a 
disconcerting  and  disquieting  rapidity."1  The  agitation 
for  the  eight-hour  day  and  the  rising  of  1906  hastened 
the  vote  on  the  weekly  rest,  induced  the  government  to 
consider  the  application  of  the  ten-hour  day,  popularized 
the  practice  of  the  "  English  week,"  etc.2 

Whether  the  same  or  better  results  could  have  been 
obtained  by  "reformist"  methods,  is  not  a  question  to 
be  considered,  because  in  most  cases  the  syndicats  have 
no  choice.  A  strike  once  begun,  the  character  of  the 
struggle  is  determined  by  conditions  which  exist  and 
not  by  any  that  would  be  desirable.  This  is  proved  by 
the  fact  that  very  often  the  so-called  "  reformist  "  syndi- 

1  A.  Pawlowski,  La  Confederation  Generate  dn  Travail,  p.  130. 
-Ibid.,  p.  123. 


2i6  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [446 

cats  carry  on  their  struggles  in  the  same  way  and  by  the 
same  methods  as  do  the  revolutionary  ones.  •' 

The  comparative  influence  of  the  Confederation  explains 
the  fact  why  the  "reformists"  do  not  leave  the  organi- 
zation, though  they  are  bitter  in  their  opposition  to  the 
revolutionists.  The  "  reformists  "  feel  that  they  would 
thereby  lose  a  support  which  is  of  value  to  them.  Besides, 
in  many  cases  such  an  act  would  lead  to  divisions  within 
the  reformist  federations,  all  of  which,  as  already  indi- 
cated, contain  considerable  revolutionary  minorities. 

The  revolutionary  syndicalists,  however,  are  in  their 
urn  compelled  to  make  concessions  to  those  exigences 
of  the  labor  movement  which  have  nothing  to  do  with 
revolutionary  ends.  Of  course,  the  revolutionary  syndi- 
calists are  workingmen  and  they  are  interested  in  the  im- 
mediate improvement  of  economic  conditions.  But 
there  can  be  little  doubt  that  the  leaders  and  the  more 
conscious  and  pronounced  revolutionary  syndicalists  are 
mainly  interested  in  their  revolutionary  ideal,  in  the  abo- 
lition of  capitalism  and  of  the  wage-system.  The  strug- 
gles for  higher  wages,  shorter  hours,  etc.,  are  a  necessity 
which  they  must  make  a  virtue  of  while  awaiting  the  hoped- 
for  final  struggle.  And  when  they  theorize  about  the 
continuity  of  the  struggles  of  to-day  with  the  great  strug- 
gles of  to-morrow,  when  they  interpret  their  every-day 
activities  as  part  of  a  continuous  social  warfare,  they  are 
merely  creating  a  theory  which  in  its  turn  justifies  their 
practice,Nand  preserves  their  revolutionary  fire  from  ex- 
tinction. 

But  theorizing  does  not  essentially  change  the  character 
of  all  syndicalist  activities.  The  Confederal  Committee 
must  attend  to  the  administrative  and  other  questions, 
such  as  the  questions  of  viaiicum,  of  the  label,  etc.  The 
necessities  of  the  syndical  movement  often  lead  the  mem- 


447]  CHARACTER  AND  CONDITIONS  217 

bers  of  the  Confederal  Committee  into  the  antechambers 
of  Parliament  or  into  the  private  rooms  of  the  Ministers 
whose  assistance  is  solicited.  The  most  revolutionary 
federations  can  not  help  entering  into  negotiations  with 
employers  for  the  settlement  of  strikes.  In  practice, 
therefore,  the  distinction  between  "revolutionary"  and 
"  reformist"  syndicalists  is  often  obscured,  because  both 
act  as  they  must  and  not  as  they  would. ' 

This  must  not  be  interpreted  to  mean  that  there  is  any 
conscious  hypocrisy  or  undue  personal  interest  on  the 
part  of  the  leaders  of  the  revolutionary  syndicalists.  On 
the  contrary,  the  most  bitter  opponents  of  the  Confed- 
eration must  admit  that  the  reverse  is  true.  "  However 
one  may  judge  their  propaganda,"  says  M.  Mermeix,  "he 
is  obliged  to  acknowledge  the  disinterestedness  of  the 
libertarians  who  lead  the  syndicalist  movement.  They  do 
not  work  for  money.  ..."  There  is  also  no  field  in 
the  Confederation  for  political  ambition.  Still  the  move- 
ment has  its  demands  which  require  suppleness  and  pli- 
ability on  the  part  of  the  leaders  and  which  make  im- 
possible the  rigid  application  of  principles. 
^  On  the  other  hand,  the  revolutionary  syndicalists  have 
m  the  syndicats  a  tremendous  force  for  their  revolution- 
ary ends.  The  close  relation  of  syndical  life  to  all  polit- 
ical and  economic  problems  gives  the  Confederal  Com- 
mittee the  opportunity  to  participate  in  all  questions  of 
interest.  The  high  cost  of  living,  the  danger  of  a  war, 
the  legislative  policy  of  the  government,  troubles  among 
the  wine-growers,  any  public  question,  indeed,  is  the 
occasion  for  the  intervention  of  the  Confederal  Com- 

1  This  is  admitted  by  both  sides.     See  reports  of  last  Congress  held 
at  Toulouse  (1910),  p.  in. 

Terrail-Mermeix,  La  Syndicalistne  contre  le  Socialisme  (Paris,  1907) , 
p.  231. 


2i8  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [448 

mittee.  The  latter  appears,  then,  also  as  a  revolutionary 
organization  which  is  always  ready  to  criticise,  to  dis- 
credit and  to  attack  the  government,  and  which  is  openly 
pursuing  the  overthrow  of  existing  institutions  in  France. 
And  when  one  keeps  in  mind  the  indefatigable  anti- 
militaristic and  anti-patriotic  propaganda  carried  on  by 
the  Bourses  du  Travail  all  over  the  country,  the  revolu- 
tionary character  of  the  Confederation  may  be  fully  ap- 
preciated. J 

What  is  the  future  that  may  be  predicted  for  the  Gen- 
eral Confederation  of  Labor  ?  Will  the  synthesis  of 
revolutionism  and  of  unionism  that  has  been  achieved  in 
it  continue  more  or  less  stable  until  the  "  final "  triumph 
of  the  revolutionary  syndicalists  ?  Or  will  the  latter  be 
overpowered  by  the  "reformist"  elements  who  will  im- 
press their  ideas  on  the  Confederation  and  who  will 
change  the  character  of  French  syndicalism  ? 

These  questions  cannot  at  present  be  answered.  The 
movement  is  so  young  that  no  clear  tendencies  either 
way  can  be  discerned.  The  two  possibilities,  however, 
may  be  considered  in  connection  with  the  conditions 
that  would  be  required  to  transform  them  into  realities. 

Those  who  predict  a  change  in  the  character  of  French 
syndicalism  generally  have  the  history  of  English  Trades 
Unionism  in  mind.  They  compare  revolutionary  syndi- 
calism to  the  revolutionary  period  of  English  Trades 
Unionism  and  think  of  the  change  that  came  about  in 
the  latter  in  the  third  quarter  of  the  past  century.  But 
the  comparison  is  of  little  value,  because  the  conditions 
of  France  are  different  from  those  of  England,  and  be- 
cause the  international  economic  situation  to-day  is  very 
different  from  what  it  was  fifty  years  ago. 

It  is  probable  that  if  the  French  syndicats  should  de- 
velop into  large  and  strong  unions,  highly  centralized 


449]  CHARACTER  AND  CONDITIONS  219 

and  provided  with  large  treasuries,  other  ideas  and 
methods  would  prevail  in  the  syndicalist  movement. 
But  this  change  is  dependent  on  a  change  in  the  eco- 
nomic life  of  France.  France  must  cease  to  be  "the 
banker  of  Europe,"  must  cease  to  let  other  countries 
use  its  piled-up  millions1  for  the  development  of  their 
natural  resources  and  industry,  and  must  devote  itself  to 
the  intensification  of  its  own  industrial  activities.  Such 
a  change  could  bring  about  greater  productivity,  higher 
wages,  and  a  higher  concentration  of  the  workingmen 
of  the  country.  This  change  in  conditions  of  life  might 
result  in  a  modification  of  the  psychology  of  the  French 
workingmen,  though  how  rapid  and  how  thorough-going 
such  a  process  could  be  is  a  matter  of  conjecture.  But 
whether  France  will  or  can  follow  the  example  of  Eng- 
land or  of  Germany,  in  view  of  its  natural  resources  and 
of  the  situation  of  the  international  market,  it  does  not 
seem  possible  to  say.2  Besides,  to  change  completely 
the  character  of  French  syndicalism,  it  would  be  neces- 
sary to  wipe  out  the  political  history  of  France  and  its 
revolutionary  traditions. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  triumph  of  the  revolutionary 
syndicalists  presupposes  a  total  readjustment  of  groups 
and  of  interests.  The  Confederation  counts  now  about 
600,000  members.  Official  statistics  count  over  1,000,- 
ooo  organized  workingmen  in  France.  But  it  must  be 
remembered  that  the  federations  underestimate  their 
numbers  for  the  Confederation  in  order  to  pay  less, 
while  they  exaggerate  their  numbers  for  the  Annuaire 
Statistique  in  order  to  appear  more  formidable.  The 
Confederation,  besides,  for  various  reasons  rejects  a 
number  of  organizations  which  desire  to  join  it.  It  may 

1  It  is  estimated  that  France  has  about  40,000,000,000  francs  invested 
in  foreign  countries. 

2  See  Preface  to  Second  Edition. 


220  THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [450 

be  safe  to  say,  therefore,  that  the  Confederation  brings 
under  its  influence  the  greater  part  of  the  organized 
workingmen  of  France. 

But  the  total  number  of  workingmen  in  France,  ac- 
cording to  the  Census  of  1906,  is  about  10,000,000,  of 
which  about  5,000,000  are  employed  in  industry  and  in 
transportation.  The  numbers  of  independent  producers 
in  industry,  commerce,  and  agriculture  is  about  9,000,- 
ooo,  of  which  about  2,000,000  are  petits  patrons.  Over 
a  million  and  a  half  persons  are  engaged  in  the  liberal 
professions  and  in  the  public  services.1 

Among  the  latter  the  revolutionary  syndicalists  have 
met  with  success  in  recent  years.  The  ideas  of  revolu- 
tionary syndicalism  have  gained  adherents  among  the 
employees  of  the  Post  Office,  Telegraph  and  Telephone, 
and  among  the  teachers  of  the  public  schools.  The 
recent  Congresses  of  the  teachers  have  declared  them- 
selves ready  to  collaborate  with  the  workingmen  for  the 
realization  of  their  ideal  society.  The  following  motion 
adopted  by  the  recent  Congress  of  Nantes,  at  which  500 
delegates  were  present,  is  very  characteristic :  "The  pro- 
fessional associations  of  teachers  (men  and  women), 
employees  of  the  State,  of  the  Departments  and  of  the 
Communes,"  reads  the  motion,  "  assembled  in  the 
Bourses  du  Travail,  declare  their  sympathy  for  the 
working-class,  declare  that  the  best  form  of  professional 
action  is  the  syndical  form;  express  their  will  to  work 
together  with  the  workingmen's  organizations  for  the 
realization  of  the  Social  Republic."2 

Also  among  the  industrial  and  commercial  middle 
classes  there  are  some  who  look  with  favor  on  syndical- 

1  The  active  population  in  1906  was  over  20,000,000,  out  of  a  total 
population  of  over  39,000,000.     Journal  des  Economistes,  Jan.,  1911. 
* L' Humanitt,  Augusts,  1911. 


45  I  ]  CHARACTER  AND  CONDITIONS  221 

ism.  The  French  middle  classes  have  for  the  last  quarter 
of  a  century  tried  to  organize  themselves  for  resistance 
against  the  "  financial  feudalism  "  from  which  they  suffer. 
Several  organizations  have  been  formed  among  the  small 
merchants  and  masters,  and  in  1908  the  "  Association 
for  the  Defense  of  the  Middle  Classes"  was  constituted. 
The  president  of  this  Association,  M.  Colrat,  wrote : 
"The  ideas  of  the  bourgeois  syndicalism  on  the  future 
are  the  same  as  those  of  the  workingmen's  syndicalism. 
.  .  .  Far  from  contradicting  one  another,  the  syndical- 
ism of  the  middle  classes  and  the  syndicalism  of  the 
working-classes  reinforce  each  other  in  many  respects, 
and  notwithstanding  many  vexations,  they  lead  to  a 
state  of  relative  equilibrium  by  a  certain  equality  of  op- 
posing forces."1  In  the  struggle  against  the  big  cap- 
italists the  leaders  of  the  middle  classes  appear  to  be 
ready  to  form  an  alliance  with  the  working-class.  There 
can  be  little  doubt,  however,  that  the  middle  classes  in 
general  are  opposed  to  the  revolutionary  ideals  of  the 
syndicalists.  To  succeed,  the  revolutionary  syndicalists 
must  bring  about  a  change  in  the  attitude  of  these 
classes,  for  the  history  of  France  has  shown  that  the 
fear  of  "  Communism "  may  throw  the  middle  classes 
into  the  arms  of  a  Caesar. 

Whatever  possibility  may  become  a  reality,  France  seems 
destined  to  go  through  a  series  of  more  or  less  serious 
struggles.  Hampered  by  the  elements  which  hark  back 
to  the  past  and  which  have  not  yet  lost  all  importance, 
disorganized  by  the  revolutionists  who  look  forward  to 
the  future  for  the  realization  of  their  ideal,  the  Republic 
of  France  is  still  lacking  the  stability  which  could  save 
her  from  upheavals  and  from  historical  surprises.]  The 

1  M.  Colrat,  I'ers  I' equilibre  social,  quoted  by  Mr.  J.  L.  Puecht,  "  Le 
Mouvement  cles  Classes  Moyennes,"  in  La  Grande  Revue,  Dec.,  1910. 


THE  LABOR  MOVEMENT  IN  FRANCE  [452 

highly  centralized  form  of  government  and  the  domina- 
ting position  which  Paris  still  holds  in  the  life  of  France 
make  such  surprises  easier  and  more  tempting  than  would 
otherwise  be  the  case.  The  process  of  social  readjustment 
which  is  going  on  all  over  the  world  at  present,  therefore, 
must  lead  in  France  to  a  more  or  less  catastrophic  col- 
lision of  the  discordant  elements  which  her  political  and 
economic  history  have  brought  into  existence. 

The  struggle  has  already  begun.  The  government  of 
the  Republic  is  determined  to  put  an  end  to  the  revolu- 
tionary activities  of  the  syndicalists.  It  is  urged  on  by 
all  those  who  believe  that  only  the  weakness  of  the  Gov- 
ernment has  been  the  cause  of  the  strength  of  the  Syndi- 
calists. On  the  other  hand,  the  Syndicalists  are  determined 
to  fight  their  battle  to  the  end.  What  the  outcome  may 
be  is  hidden  in  the  mystery  of  the  future.  Qui  vivra — 
verra. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Action    Directe.      Revue    Revolutionnaire    Syndicaliste.      Paris,    July, 

1903-August,  1904. 
Annuaire  Statistique.     Ministere  du  Travail  et  de  la  Prevoyance  So- 

ciale.    Paris. 
Antonelli,  E.    La  democratic  sociale  (levant  les  idees  presentes.    Paris, 

1911. 
Associations  professionnelles  ouvrieres;  office  du  Travail.    Paris,  1899- 

1904. 

Barberet,  J.    Monographics  professionnelles.    4  vols.    Paris,  1886. 
Bataille  Syndicaliste.    Daily. 

Berth,  Edouard.    Les  nouveaux  aspects  du  socialisme.    Paris,  1908. 
Blum,  Leon.    Les  congres  ouzriers  et  socialities  franfais.    Paris,  1901. 
Bougie,  E.    Syndicalisme  et  democratic.     Paris,  1908. 
Bourdeau,  J.    Entre  deux  servitudes.    Paris,  1910. 
Bourgin,    H.     Le   socialisme   et   la   concentration   industrielle.     Paris, 

1911. 

Boyle,  James.    Minimum  Wage  and  Syndicalism.    Cincinnati,  1913. 
Bracq,  J.  Ch.    France  under  the  Republu.    New  York,  1910. 
Brants,  Victor.     La  petite  Industrie  contemporaine.     Paris,  1902. 
Breton,  J.  L.    L'Unite  Socialiste.    Vol.  7  of  Histoire  des  partis  social- 

istes,  ed.  by  Zevaes.    Paris,  1912. 

Brooks,  John  Graham.    American  Syndicalism.    New  York,  1913. 
Buisson,  Etienne.    La  greve  generale.    Paris,  1905. 
Chaboseau,  A.    DC  Babeuf  a  la  Commune.    Volume  I  of  Histoire  des 

partis  socialistes,  edited  by  Zevaes. 
Challaye,    Felicien.     Syndicalisme   revolutionnaire   et  syndicalisme   re- 

formiste.     Paris,  1909. 

Chambre  des  Deputes,  Debats  Parlementaires. 
Charnay,   Maurice.     Les  Allemanistcs.     Vol.  5  of  Histoire  des  partis 

socialistes,   edited  by  Zevaes. 

Clay,  Sir  Arthur.    Syndicalism  and  Labor.    London,  1912. 
Cole,  G.  D.  H.    The  World  of  Labor.    London,  1913. 
Commission    Ouvriere   de    1867,    recueil    des    proces-verbaux.     2    vols. 

Paris,  1868-69. 
Congres    national    des    syndicats    ouvriers    tenu    a   Lyon    en    Octobre, 

1886,  compte  rendu  Lyon.  1887. 

453]  223 


224  BIBLIOGRAPHY  [454 

Congres  general   des  organisations   socialistes,   compte  rendu.     Paris, 

1899. 
Congres    (deuxieme)    general   des  organisations   socialistes    frangaises 

tenu  a  Paris  de  28  au  30  Septembre,  1900,  compte  rendu.     Paris, 

1901. 
Congres    (troisieme)    general   des   organisations   socialistes    franchises 

tenu  a  Lyon  du  26  au  28  mar.,  1901,  compte  rendu.    Paris,  1901. 
Congres  national  des  syndicats  tenu  a  Marseilles  du  19  au  22  Octobre, 

1892,  compte  rendu.     Paris,  1909. 
Congres  national  du  Parti  Ouvrier  tenu  a  Paris  du  II  au  14  Juillet, 

1897,  compte  rendu. 
Congres   national   corporatif    (IV€   de   la  Confederation    Generate   du 

Travail),  tenu  a  Rennes,  compte  rendu.    Rennes,  1898. 
Congres  national  corporatif   (Ve  de  la  Confederation),  tenu  a  Paris, 

compte  rendu.     Paris,  1900. 
Congres  national  corporatif  (VIe  de  la  Confederation),  tenu  a  Lyon, 

compte  rendu.    Lyon,  1901. 
Congres    national    corporatif     (VIIe    de    la    Confederation),    tenu    a 

Montpellier,  compte  rendu.     Montpellier,  1902. 
Congres    national    corporatif    (VIII«    de    la    Confederation),    tenu    a 

Bourges,  compte  rendu.    Bourges,  1904. 
Congres    national    corporatif     (IXe    de    la    Confederation),    tenu    a 

Amiens,  compte  rendu.    Amiens,  1906. 
Congres    national     corporatif     (X«    de    la    Confederation),    tenu    a 

Marseille,  compte  rendu.    Marseille,  1909. 
Congres    national    corporatif     (XIe    de    la    Confederation),    tenu    a 

Toulouse,  compte  rendu.    Paris,  1911. 
Congres    national    corporatif     (XIIe    de    la    Confederation),    tenu    a 

Havre,  compte  rendu.     Paris,  1913. 
Congres  socialiste  international  tenu  a  Paris  du  23  au  27  septembre, 

1900.     Paris,  1901. 
Connay,   J.     Le   Compagnonnage,  son   histoire,  ses   mystcres.     Paris, 

1909. 
Cornelissen,  Ch.    "  Ueber  den  internationalen  Syndikalismus."    Archiv 

fur  Sozialwissenschaft  und  Sozia'politik.    Tubingen,  1910. 
Crouzel,  A.     Etude  historique,  economique  et  juridique  sur  les  coali- 
tions et  les  groves.     Paris,  1887. 
Da  Costa,   Charles.     Les  Blanquistes.     Vol.  6  of  Histoire  des  partis 

socialistes,  edited  by  Zevaes.    Paris,  1912. 
Delesalle,  J.    Les  Bourses  du  Travail  et  la  C.  G.  T.    Paris. 
Delessale,  P.    L'action  syndicaliste  et  les  anarchistes.    Paris,  1900. 
Deville,  G.    Principes  socialistes.    Paris,  1806. 
Dijol,   M.     Situation   economique  de   la  France,  sous  le  regime  pro- 

tectioniste  de  1892.    Paris,  1911. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


22$ 


Diligent,  Victor.     Lcs  orientations  syndicates.     Paris,  1910. 

Dru,  Gaston.    La  Revolution  qui  vient.    Paris. 

Dubois,  F.     The  Anarchist  Peril.    Tr.  by  Ralph  Derechef.    London. 

Dubreilh,  L.    La  Commune.     Paris,  1908. 

Du-Cellier,    M.     Ilistoire   des   classes   laborieuses   en   France.     Paris, 

1860. 

Dufour.    Le  Syndicalistic  ct  la  Prochaine  Revolution.    Paris,  1913. 
Economists  Francais.     Monthly. 

Kgalite.     Periodical  published  from  1877  to  1881.     Paris. 
El\%  R.  T.    French  and  German  Socialism.    New  York,  1898. 
Kstey,  James  Arthur.    Revolutionary  Syndicalism.    London,  1913. 
Faguet,  E.    Le  socialisms  en  1907.     Paris,  1907. 
Festy,  Octave.     Le  mouvemcnt  ouvrier  an  debut  de  la  Monarchic  de 

Juillet.     Paris. 
Forces  productive*  de  la  France.     Conferences  organisees  a  la  Societe 

des  anciens  eleves  de  1'Ecole  libre  des  Sciences  politiques.     Paris, 

1909. 
Franck,  Charles.     Les  Bourses  du  travail  et  la  Confederation   Gcner- 

ale  du  Travail.    Paris,  1910. 
Fribourg,  E.  E.     L'Association    'Internationale  des  travailleurs.     Paris, 

1871. 

Garin,  J.    L'anarchic  ct  Ics  anarchistcs.    Paris,  1885. 
Georgi,  E.     Thcoric  und  Praxis  des  Gcneralstreiks  in   dcr  nwdcrncn 

Arbsiterbswsgung.    Jena,  1908. 
Grande  Revue.    Monthly. 
Griffuelhes,  V.     Voyage  rcvolutionnaire;  impressions  d'un  propagand- 

iste.    Paris,  1910. 

Griffuelhes,  V.    L'action  syndicalists.    Paris.  1908. 
Griffuelhes,   V.    et    Xiel.    L.     I.es   objectifs   dc   nos   luttes   de   classes. 

Paris,  1909. 

Guerre  Sociale,  La,  revolutionary  weekly  edited  by  Gustave  Herve. 
Guesde,  J.     Le  Socia'iswe  au  jour  le  jour.     Paris,  1899. 
Guesde,  J.  et  Laf  argue,   P.     Le  programme  du  parti  ouvricr.     Paris, 

1897.    4th  edition. 
Guillaume,  James.     U  Internationale,  documents  et  souvenirs.     4  vols. 

Paris,  1905-10. 

ilamon.  A.     Le  Socialisme  ct  Ir  congrss  de  Londrcs.     Paris,  1897. 
Hanoteaux,  G.     Modern  France.    4  vols.    New  York,  1903-09. 
Harley,  J.  IT.    Syndicalism.    London,  1912. 
Herve,  Gustave.     My  Country.  Right  or   Wrong.     English  translation 

by  Guy  Bowman.    London,  1911. 

1  lubert-Valleroux.  I'.    La  Co-operation  en  France.    Paris,  1004. 
Humbeit,   Sylvain.     Lc  Mouvcment  Syndica!.     Vol.  9  of   Histoirc  des 

partis  socialistes.  edited  by  Zevaes.     Paris,  1912. 


226  BIBLIOGRAPHY  [456 

Humbert,  Sylvain.     Les  Possibilities.     Vol.  4  of  Histoire  des  partis 

socialistes,  edited  by  Zevaes.    Paris,  1911. 
L'Humanite.     Socialist   daily   published    since    1905.     Contains    many 

articles  by  revolutionary  and  reformist  syndicalists. 
Isambert,  G.    Les  idees  socialistes  en  France  de  1815  a  1848.     Paris, 

1905. 

Jouhaux,  L.    Le  Syndicalisme  franqais.    Bruxelles,  1911. 
Journal  des  Debats.    Weekly. 
Journal  des  £conomistes.     Monthly. 

Kirkup,  Th.    A  History  of  Socialism.    Third  edition.    New  York,  1906. 
Kritsky.    L' Evolution  du  syndicalisme  en  France.    Paris,  1908. 
Labusquiere.    La  Troisieme  Republique.    Paris,  1909. 
Lagardelle,  H.    L'Svolution  des  syndicats  ouvriers  en  France.     Paris, 

1901. 

Lagardelle,  H.    La  greve  generale  et  le  socialisme.    Paris,  1905. 
Lagardelle,  H.    Le  socialisme  ouvrier.    Paris,  1911. 
Lagardelle,  H.    "  Die  Syndikalistische  Bewegung  in  Frankreich."    Ar- 

chiv  fur  Sosialwissenschaft  und  Sozialpolitik.    Tubingen,  1908. 
Laurin,  M.  T.    Les  Instituteurs  et  le  syndicalisme.    Paris,  1908. 
Lavy,  A.    L'Oeuvre  de  Millerand.    Paris,  1902. 
Leroy,  Maxime.    Syndicats  et  Services  Publics.    Paris,  1909. 
Levasseur,  E.    Histoire  des  classes  ouvrieres  et  d'industrie  en  France 

avant  1789.    2  vols.    Second  edition.    Paris,  1900. 
Levasseur,  E.    Histoire  des  classes  ouvrieres  et  d'industrie  en  France 

de  1789  a  1870.    2  vols.    Second  edition.    Paris,  1903. 
Levine,  Louis.    "  The  Development  of  Syndicalism  in  America."    Politi- 
cal Science  Quarterly,  September,  1913. 

Levine,  Louis.     "  Direct  Action."    Forum.     New  York,  May,  1912. 
Levine,  Louis.     "Syndicalism."    North  American  Review.    July,  1912. 
Levine,   Louis.     "  The    Standpoint   of    Syndicalism."     Annals   of   the 

American  Academy  of  Political  and  Social  Science.    1912. 
Lewis,  Arthur  D.    Syndicalism  and  the  General  Strike.    London,  1912. 
Liber taire,  Le.    Anarchist  weekly. 
Lorulot,  Andre.     Le  Syndicalisme  et  la  transformation  sociale.     Ar- 

cueil,  1909. 

Louis,  Paul,    Histoire  du  socialisme  franc.ais.    Paris,  1901. 
Louis,  P.    Histoire  du  mouvement  syndical  en  France.    Paris,  1907. 
Louis,  P.    Le  syndicalisme  contre  I'etat.    Paris,  1910. 
Louis,  P.     "  Die  Einheitsbestrebungen  im  f ranzosischen  Sozialismus." 

Archiv  fur  Sosialwissenschaft  und  Sosialpolitik.    Tubingen,  1909. 
Macdonald,  J.  Ramsay.    Syndicalism.     1912. 
Meline,  J.     The  Return  to  the  Land.     Tr.   from  the  French.     New 

York,  1907. 


457]  BIBLIOGRAPHY  227 

Milhaud,  A.     La  lutte  des  classes  a  trovers  I'histoire  et  la  politique. 

Paris. 

Millerand,  A.    Le  socialisme  reformiste  franc,  ais.    Paris,  1903. 
Molinari,  G.    Les  Bourses  du  Travail.    Paris,  1893. 
Molinari,  G.    Le  mouvement  socialiste  et  les  reunions  publiques.    Paris, 

1872. 
Mouvement  Socialiste.     Published   since    1899.     Particularly   valuable 

for  students  of  revolutionary  syndicalism. 
Orry,  Albert.     Les  Socialistes  Independant.     Vol.  8  of  Histoire   des 

partis  socialistes,  edited  by  Zevaes.    Paris,  1911. 
Parti  Socialiste.    Proceedings  of  annual  conventions  (1904-1913). 
Pataud,  E.  et  Pouget,  E.     Comment  nous  ferons  la  revolution.     Paris, 

1909.    Translated  into  English  by  Charlotte  and  Frederick  Charles, 

under    title:    Syndicalism    and    the    Co-operative    Commonwealth. 

London,  1913. 

Pawlowski,  A.    La  confederation  generate  du  travail.     Paris,  1910. 
Pelloutier,  F.    Le  congres  general  du  parti  socialiste  franqais.     Paris, 

1900. 

Pelloutier,  F.    Histoire  des  bourses  du  travail.     Paris,  1902. 
Pelloutier,   Maurice.     Fernand  Pelloutier,  sa  vie,  son   oeuvre.     Paris, 

I9II. 

Pelloutier,  F.  et  M.    La  vie  ouvriere.    Paris,  1900. 
Perdiguier,    Agricol.     Le   livre   du   compagnonnage.      Second    edition. 

Paris,  1841. 

Pierrot.    Syndualism  et  revolution.     Second  edition.    Paris,  1908. 
Pouget,  E.    Le  sabotage.     Paris,  1910.     English  translation  by  Arturo 

M.  Giovannitti. 

Pouget,  E.    Les  bases  du  syndicalisms.    Paris. 
Pouget,  S.    Le  syndicat.    Paris. 
Pouget,  E.    Le  parti  du  travail.    Paris. 

Pouget,  E.    La  confederation  generate  du  travail.    Paris,  1908. 
Prolo,  Jacques.    Les  Anarchistes.    Vol.  10  of  Histoire  des  partis  social- 
istes, edited  by  Zevaes.     Paris,  1912. 
Proudhon,  J.  P.    De  la  capacite  politique  des  classes  ouvricres.    Paris, 

1865. 

Renard,  Georges.    La  republique  de  1848.     Paris,  1907. 
Renard,  G.    Syndicats,  trades  unions,  et  corporations.     Paris,  1909. 
Renault,  Ch.    Histoire  des  grcves.    Paris,  1887. 
Revue  Socialiste.    Monthly. 
Revue  Syndicaliste.     Monthly  published  from  May,  1905,  to  January, 

1910. 

Seances  du  Congres  Ouvrier  de  France.     Session  de  1876.    Paris,  1877. 
Seilhac,  Leon  de.     Syndicats  ouvriers,  federations,  bourses  du  travail. 

Paris,  1902. 


228  BIBLIOGRAPHY  [458 

Seilhac,  Leon  de.    Les  congres  ouvriers  en  France.    Paris,  1899. 

Seilhac,  Leon  de.    Le  monde  socialiste.    Paris,  1896. 

Severac,  G.    Guide  pratique  des  syndicats  professionals.    Paris,  1908. 

Smith,  L.    Les  coalitions  et  les  greves.    Paris,  1885. 

Socialiste,  Le.    Organe  central  du  Parti  Socialiste  Frangais. 

Sombart,  Werner.  Socialism  and  the  Social  Movement.  English  tr. 
by  M.  Epstein.  New  York,  1909. 

Sorel,  G.  L'avenir  socialiste  des  syndicats.  Revised  edition.  Paris, 
1901. 

Sorel,  G.    La  decomposition  du  marxisme.     Paris,  1908. 

Sorel,  G.    Illusions  du  pr ogres.    Paris,  1911.     Second  edition. 

Sorel,  G.    Reflexions  sur  la  violence.    Paris,  1910.     Second  edition. 

Sorel,  G.    Introduction  a  I' economic  moderne.    Second  edition.    Paris. 

Sorel,  G.    La  revolution  dreyfusienne.    Second  edition.     Paris,  1911. 

Sorel,  G.  "  La  polemique  pour  1'interpretation  du  marxisme."  Revue 
Internationale  de  sociologie.  Paris,  1900. 

Sorel,  G.    "  L'ethique  du  socialisme."    Morale  Sociale.    Paris,  1900. 

Spargo,  John.  Syndicalism,  Industrial  Unionism,  and  Socialism.  New 
York,  1913. 

Stoddart,  J.  T.    The  New  Socialism.    London,  1910. 

St.  Leon,  E.  Martin.    Le  compagnnonnage.    Paris,  1901. 

Syndicalistic  et  socialisme.    Paris,  1908. 

Syndicat  et  syndicalisme;  opinions  par  Griffuelhes,  Yvetot,  Pouget,  etc. 
Paris. 

Terrail-Mermeix.    La  France  socialiste.    Paris,  1886. 

Terrail-Mermeix.    Le  syndicalisme  contre  le  socialisme.     Paris,  1907. 

Terrassier,  Le.  Published  bi-weekly  by  some  syndicats  of  the  build- 
ing-trades. 

Temps  Nouveaux.    Anarchist  weekly. 

Thomas,  Albert.    Le  second  empire.    Paris,  1907. 

Tridon,  Andre.     The  New  Unionism.    New  York,  1913. 

Vie  Ouvriere.    Revue  Syndicaliste  Bi-mensuelle.    Paris. 

Villetard,  Edmond.  History  of  the  International.  Tr.  from  the 
French,  1874. 

Voix  du  Peuple.    Organe  de  la  Confederation  Generale  du  Travail. 

Warbasse,  James  Peter.  The  Ethics  of  Sabotage.  Pamphlet.  New 
York,  1913. 

Ware,  Fabian.    The  Worker  and  his  Country.    London,  1912. 

Warin,  Robert.    Les  Syndicats  Jaunes.    Paris,  1908. 

Webb,  Sydney  and  Beatrice.  An  Examination  of  Syndicalism.  Lon- 
don, 1912. 

Webb,  B.  and  ,S.    History  of  Trade  Unionism. 

Weill,  George.  Histoire  du  mouvement  social  en  France.  First  edi- 
tion, 1904.  Second  edition,  1910. 


459]  BIBLIOGRAPHY  229 

Weill,  G.  "  Die  Formen  der  Arbeiterbewegung  in  Frankreich."  Ar- 
chiv  fur  Sosialwissenschaft  und  Sozialpolitik.  Tubingen,  1909. 

Yvetot,  George.    A.  B.  C.  syndicaliste.     Paris. 

Yvetot,  G.    Manuel  du  soldat.    Paris. 

Zevaes,  Alexandre.  Histoire  des  partis  socialistes  en  France,  n  vol- 
umes. Paris,  1911. 

Zevaes,  Alexandre.    Le  Socialisme  en  France  depuis  1871.     Paris,  1908. 

Zevaes,  Alexandre.    Le  Syndicalisme  Contemporain.    Paris,  1911. 

Zevaes,  Alexandre.  Le  Socialisme  en  1912.  Vol.  n  of  Histoire  des 
partis  socialistes.  Paris,  1912. 

Zevaes,  Alexandre.  De  la  semaine  sanglante  au  Congrcs  de  Marseille 
(1871-1879).  Vol.  2  of  Histoire  des  partis  socialistes,  edited  by 
Zevaes.  Paris,  1911. 

Zevaes,  Alexandre.  Les  Guesdistes.  Vol.  3  of  Histoire  des  partis 
socialistes.  Paris,  1911. 


University  of  California 

SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 

305  De  Neve  Drive  -  Parking  Lot  17  •  Box  951388 

LOS  ANGELES,  CALIFORNIA  90095-1388 

Return  this  material  to  the  library  from  which  it  was  borrowed. 


RfiCOYRL 


College 


MAY 


634s4)4280 


University  ol  California.  Los  Angeles 


L  005  455  216  1 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILIT 


A     001  151  282     9 


